It's actually not surprising, design by committee has a high failure rate. On Fri, Jul 10, 2009 at 5:01 AM, Sean Comerford <sean.c.comerf...@gmail.com>wrote:
> No matter what you think of it, there's no disputing that JSF never really > gained much of a foothold on the "Internet" at large. > > But for developing lower traffic, "intranet" style business apps (workflow > management, HR tools, etc) it's actually very good. And attracting the > Visual basic, "business" developer to Java via JSF's ease of use and slick > components was a big part of why JSF was created. I've developed internal > usage business apps at several different major .com (as well as Sun itself!) > using JSF but agree you would never dare to build a serious internet facing > application with it... I don't believe it was ever intended for that or that > the JSF lifecycle would scale. > > As an ex-Sun employee who still loves the company, JSF to me is just > another example of lack of concise direction at Sun in the last decade... > just one of all too many promising technologies that ended up sort of dying > on the vine as resources were spread too thin across too many projects as > Sun tried something, ANYTHING to make up for plummeting hardware sales. > > > On Thu, Jul 9, 2009 at 3:01 PM, MassH <massimohei...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> >> In the interview with Cay Horstmann, I heard this: >> >> "People love to hate Java Server Faces, but (you know) what's the >> alternative?" >> >> What's the alternative? I can't believe he even asked that! What about >> the dozen or so high-quality JVM web frameworks that most Java >> developers prefer: Stripes, Wicket, Tapestry, Open Laszlo, Struts 2.1, >> Google Web Toolkit, Lift (Scala), Grails (Groovy), etc? >> >> Basically, he's dismissing the negativity towards JSF as just the >> typical whining... >> >> Notice that for the past several years, evens Sun's official >> evangelists have basically ignored JSF in favor of promoting JRuby and >> Rails/Java/Glassfish integration and adoption. >> >> Also, take a look at job boards. Legacy projects are using Struts 1.x, >> but new Java web projects are using the JVM community frameworks >> mentioned earlier over JSF. Also, notice how popular, flashy-GUI web >> sites that use JVM technologies on the server, have almost all steered >> clear of JSF (mint.com, google, twitter, ebay, pandora, zoho, etc). >> >> And personally, I spent a *huge* amount of effort on a JSF 1.1 project >> and I have no personal stake in any JVM politics, I'm generally very >> pro-Sun (love JavaFX, NetBeans, etc), and I really think JSF was over- >> engineered and over-complicated for what it delivered. >> >> >> Bottom line: I'd really like to see The Posse discuss this kind of >> thing a little more. I'm sure the talent behind JSF was great and well- >> intentioned, but the community should be putting more attention on the >> better and more successful products in that same space. >> >> > > > > -- Viktor Klang Java Specialist Scala Loudmouth Lift Committer --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "The Java Posse" group. To post to this group, send email to javaposse@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to javaposse+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/javaposse?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
