Re: GWT vs SmartGWT

[saida dhanavath]

I would recommend to go with GWT for your requirement, for WSDL just go
with GWT-RPC and from RPC server/servlet connect to WSDL.

point here is there has been a continuous improvement/enhancement on GWT
since last 2 year.

Best regrads,
Saida.

On Wed, Oct 31, 2012 at 12:07 PM, tong123123  wrote:

> I found pure gwt developer guide, documentation and community forum is
> quite helpful, for GXT, I try to learn but there is no any tutorial like
> the stockwatch program, and no developer guide, the forum has poor
> response..., so I really do not know how to start with GXT although its UI
> is very attractive!!
>
>
>  --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "Google Web Toolkit" group.
> To view this discussion on the web visit
> https://groups.google.com/d/msg/google-web-toolkit/-/yulXJ3c6_wwJ.
>
> To post to this group, send email to google-web-toolkit@googlegroups.com.
> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> google-web-toolkit+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
> For more options, visit this group at
> http://groups.google.com/group/google-web-toolkit?hl=en.
>



-- 
Regards,
Saida Dhanavath

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Google Web Toolkit" group.
To post to this group, send email to google-web-toolkit@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
google-web-toolkit+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/google-web-toolkit?hl=en.

Re: GWT vs SmartGWT

[tong123123]

I found pure gwt developer guide, documentation and community forum is 
quite helpful, for GXT, I try to learn but there is no any tutorial like 
the stockwatch program, and no developer guide, the forum has poor 
response..., so I really do not know how to start with GXT although its UI 
is very attractive!!

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Google Web Toolkit" group.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/google-web-toolkit/-/yulXJ3c6_wwJ.
To post to this group, send email to google-web-toolkit@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
google-web-toolkit+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/google-web-toolkit?hl=en.

Re: GWT vs SmartGWT

[Charles Kendrick]

Hello Валерий Остапенко,

You should probably go take a look at that thread again - looks like
you didn't see the last reply from Support.  They cleared up your
misconception, which appears to be the reason you were getting so
frustrated, and why you were trying to say the docs were wrong when
they are actually correct.

Basically it seems Support was repeating the same (correct) advice,
because they didn't realize you had this misconception and couldn't
understand why you kept saying there was a problem.  In a complex
technical discussion, two people can "talk by each other" in this way
very easily, it's not someone trying to make you look like an idiot.

On Tue, Oct 30, 2012 at 4:09 PM, Валерий Остапенко  wrote:
> Also smartgwt has a great forum support, where any Isomorphic stuff member
> can make an idiot out of you. (my recent exp:
> http://forums.smartclient.com/showthread.php?t=24112). To be honest, it's
> not that way always, sometimes you get really good, fast and  polite
> support. It all depens on who's now sitting behind the isomorphic user.
> There are some unpleasant persons there for sure.
>
> Althrough if you don't have a whole lot of time and need very feature-rich
> interface, sticking with pure gwt is not reasonable from my point of view.
> You'll just be improving visual components for years.
>
> среда, 31 октября 2012 г., 1:00:34 UTC+4 пользователь ckendrick написал:
>>
>> Hi Kumar,
>>
>> SmartGWT has an extensive ...
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "Google Web Toolkit" group.
> To view this discussion on the web visit
> https://groups.google.com/d/msg/google-web-toolkit/-/JMks0d3jaoMJ.
> To post to this group, send email to google-web-toolkit@googlegroups.com.
> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> google-web-toolkit+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
> For more options, visit this group at
> http://groups.google.com/group/google-web-toolkit?hl=en.

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Google Web Toolkit" group.
To post to this group, send email to google-web-toolkit@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
google-web-toolkit+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/google-web-toolkit?hl=en.

Re: GWT vs SmartGWT

[Валерий Остапенко]

Also smartgwt has a great forum support, where any Isomorphic stuff member 
can make an idiot out of you. (my recent exp: 
http://forums.smartclient.com/showthread.php?t=24112). To be honest, it's 
not that way always, sometimes you get really good, fast and  polite 
support. It all depens on who's now sitting behind the isomorphic user. 
There are some unpleasant persons there for sure.

Althrough if you don't have a whole lot of time and need very feature-rich 
interface, sticking with pure gwt is not reasonable from my point of view. 
You'll just be improving visual components for years.

среда, 31 октября 2012 г., 1:00:34 UTC+4 пользователь ckendrick написал:
>
> Hi Kumar,
>
> SmartGWT has an extensive ...
>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Google Web Toolkit" group.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/google-web-toolkit/-/JMks0d3jaoMJ.
To post to this group, send email to google-web-toolkit@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
google-web-toolkit+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/google-web-toolkit?hl=en.

Re: GWT vs SmartGWT

[ckendrick]

Hi Kumar,

SmartGWT has an extensive subsystem for interacting directly with WSDL web 
services from the browser.  Some samples here:

 
http://www.smartclient.com/smartgwtee/showcase/#data_integration_server_wsdl_weather

This is all part of the free LGPL product, assuming you don't need a 
server-side proxy or can handle your own proxying.

Specifically for WSDL there is nothing really comparable for plain GWT, or 
for GXT that I can find.  You'll see people recommended contacting WSDL 
services from the server side:

 http://stackoverflow.com/questions/3600723/gwt-and-webservices-wsdl

More generally, Alfredo gave a fairly balanced view: it depends on how 
demanding your requirements are.  If you need to do everything that 
SmartGWT grids can do, or even just a few key features (like say, freeze 
columns on the fly + inline filtering) you are years of R&D away from that 
if you start with plain GWT.  We know because we did the R&D :)  This is 
true even if you use incubator functionality.

On Monday, October 29, 2012 2:47:08 AM UTC-7, kumar thatikonda wrote:
>
> Hi All,
>Can you please let me know which of the option( GWT or SmartGWT) is 
> better, considering the below scenario.
>
>   1. Will be used for designing screens and client-side validations.
>   2. Performance ( page loading , grid loading) should be good.
>   3. Need to communicate with server through wsdls(web services.)
>   
>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Google Web Toolkit" group.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/google-web-toolkit/-/xSnb4UeByzcJ.
To post to this group, send email to google-web-toolkit@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
google-web-toolkit+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/google-web-toolkit?hl=en.

Re: GWT vs SmartGWT

[Thomas Broyer]

On Tuesday, October 30, 2012 5:30:56 PM UTC+1, PhiLho wrote:
>
> On 29/10/2012 21:59, Benjamin Possolo wrote: 
> > I recommend straight GWT for almost everything. The other frameworks 
> just add abstractions 
> > on top of GWT that confuse things a lot more. 
>
> They are supposed to offer a bit more than some abstraction layers and 
> nice CSS... 
> For example, they offer tables that load on demand (dynamic loading when 
> scrolling), 
> something that isn't supported by GWT out of the box, if I am not mistaken.
>

Depends what you mean by "out of the box": 
http://gwt.google.com/samples/Showcase/Showcase.html#!CwCellList
Granted that ShowMorePagerPanel could possibly graduate to GWT proper 
rather than just a sample.

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Google Web Toolkit" group.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/google-web-toolkit/-/v5q1_Q0OHXsJ.
To post to this group, send email to google-web-toolkit@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
google-web-toolkit+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/google-web-toolkit?hl=en.

Re: GWT vs SmartGWT

[Philippe Lhoste]

On 29/10/2012 21:59, Benjamin Possolo wrote:

I recommend straight GWT for almost everything. The other frameworks just add 
abstractions
on top of GWT that confuse things a lot more.


They are supposed to offer a bit more than some abstraction layers and nice 
CSS...
For example, they offer tables that load on demand (dynamic loading when scrolling), 
something that isn't supported by GWT out of the box, if I am not mistaken.

Idem for asynch trees, tree-tables, etc.
Perhaps you can find them as open-source projects (not sure) but then you have to search 
for them, choose one (if you have choice!), integrate in your project, ensure the look of 
the new widgets are consistent with the others, etc.


I would say that such framework might not be necessary for simple projects (ie. with 
simple needs, no complex widgets, small datasets) but can save time on complex projects.


--
Philippe Lhoste
--  (near) Paris -- France
--  http://Phi.Lho.free.fr
--  --  --  --  --  --  --  --  --  --  --  --  --  --

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Google 
Web Toolkit" group.
To post to this group, send email to google-web-toolkit@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
google-web-toolkit+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/google-web-toolkit?hl=en.

Re: GWT vs SmartGWT

[Alain Ekambi]

I said it before.
Nothing beats Flex on the Desktop anyway  :)



2012/10/30 Jason Hobbs 

> It will be well worth your time to add the missing bits to GWT rather than
> jump into SmartGWT.  We just re-wrote the UI on an app due to SmartGWT
> shortcomings and incompatibilities.
>
>
>
> On Monday, October 29, 2012 5:47:08 AM UTC-4, kumar thatikonda wrote:
>>
>> Hi All,
>>Can you please let me know which of the option( GWT or SmartGWT) is
>> better, considering the below scenario.
>>
>>   1. Will be used for designing screens and client-side validations.
>>   2. Performance ( page loading , grid loading) should be good.
>>   3. Need to communicate with server through wsdls(web services.)
>>
>>
>
> 
> Privileged and/or confidential information may be contained in this
> message. If you are not the addressee indicated in this message (or are not
> responsible for delivery of this message to that person) , you may not copy
> or deliver this message to anyone. In such case, you should destroy this
> message and notify the sender by reply e-mail.
> If you or your employer do not consent to Internet e-mail for messages of
> this kind, please advise the sender.
> Shaw Industries does not provide or endorse any opinions, conclusions or
> other information in this message that do not relate to the official
> business of the company  or its subsidiaries.
> 
>
>  --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "Google Web Toolkit" group.
> To view this discussion on the web visit
> https://groups.google.com/d/msg/google-web-toolkit/-/UHSqq7mqCUgJ.
>
> To post to this group, send email to google-web-toolkit@googlegroups.com.
> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> google-web-toolkit+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
> For more options, visit this group at
> http://groups.google.com/group/google-web-toolkit?hl=en.
>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Google Web Toolkit" group.
To post to this group, send email to google-web-toolkit@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
google-web-toolkit+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/google-web-toolkit?hl=en.

Re: GWT vs SmartGWT

[Jason Hobbs]

It will be well worth your time to add the missing bits to GWT rather than 
jump into SmartGWT.  We just re-wrote the UI on an app due to SmartGWT 
shortcomings and incompatibilities.



On Monday, October 29, 2012 5:47:08 AM UTC-4, kumar thatikonda wrote:
>
> Hi All,
>Can you please let me know which of the option( GWT or SmartGWT) is 
> better, considering the below scenario.
>
>   1. Will be used for designing screens and client-side validations.
>   2. Performance ( page loading , grid loading) should be good.
>   3. Need to communicate with server through wsdls(web services.)
>   
>

-- 
**
Privileged and/or confidential information may be contained in this 
message. If you are not the addressee indicated in this message (or are not 
responsible for delivery of this message to that person) , you may not copy 
or deliver this message to anyone. In such case, you should destroy this 
message and notify the sender by reply e-mail.
If you or your employer do not consent to Internet e-mail for messages of 
this kind, please advise the sender.
Shaw Industries does not provide or endorse any opinions, conclusions or 
other information in this message that do not relate to the official 
business of the company  or its subsidiaries.
**

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Google Web Toolkit" group.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/google-web-toolkit/-/UHSqq7mqCUgJ.
To post to this group, send email to google-web-toolkit@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
google-web-toolkit+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/google-web-toolkit?hl=en.

Re: GWT vs SmartGWT

[Alain Ekambi]

Smart GWT  runs on the client.


2012/10/30 Sebastián Gurin 

> Also, besides Joseph said (it is true in my case), there is a fundamental
> difference and it is that vaadin, smartGWT, etc uses an architecture where
> they depend on server side stuff. For example, all vaading Java code runs
> in the serverside, and the webapp is rendered 100% on the serverside. The
> widgets depend on this server side for rendering and there is client-server
> comunication for rendering, layouting, events, etc.
>
> In pure GWT, you are not dependent on a certain serverside technology, you
> could use php, java container or even no serverside at all.
>
> Also, I have found difficult to interoperate between technologies like
> vaadin and smartGWT with 3rd party JavaScript widgets, or even with "normal
> GWT ".
>
> Regards
>
>
> On Tuesday, October 30, 2012 9:38:30 AM UTC-2, Alfredo Quiroga-Villamil
> wrote:
>
>> I've seen in the past many comments and different opinions about
>> Vaadin, GXT, SmartGWT and "GWT-only" apps. I think the fundamental
>> thing to remember here is resources.
>>
>> If you work for a company where you can afford to have the designer/s,
>> a CSS savy person/s and the time to build and enhance more than
>> anything pure GWT widgets then by all means go with the GWT only
>> approach. Do that also if you know the app is being built and will be
>> there to stay for a loog time.
>>
>> However,  in many cases we all seem to think that those frameworks
>> only provide cosmetic things and they really don't. They actually
>> provide a whole lot more than just style. Not all "GWT-only" widgets,
>> but many actually need a lot of work in both how they look as well as
>> how they are used programmatically.
>>
>> Not too long ago I set out to build a pure GWT app (one man app only
>> and being built by someone, me in this case that have been building
>> GWT for quite some time) and I was the one that almost jumped off the
>> building in this case. I found myself, styling things, some of the
>> widgets needed a lot of extra boiler plate (take Cell Table for
>> instance), just to do basic stuff that using some of the other
>> frameworks mentioned would just be one or a few lines of code.
>>
>> So if you have to make a decision, think about one thing and one thing
>> only. Do you truly have the resources/time, both design and coding
>> wise to enhance the existing GWT widgets? The answer to that will
>> likely tell you what to use and it's likely the reason why those
>> companies are such "value-add" to the existing GWT code base.
>>
>> As far as performance goes, unless you are building an App for
>> something extremely, and I emphasize extremely demanding, there is
>> little to none chance that using GXT, Vaadin or SmartGWT will have an
>> actual impact on your app.
>>
>> Alfredo
>>
>> On Mon, Oct 29, 2012 at 8:01 PM, Joseph Lust  wrote:
>> > Folks in my company were just asking me this the other day. If you want
>> an
>> > app that looks like the GXT or SmartGWT showcase, and absolutely
>> nothing
>> > more, then use them. But you'll have to bend to their paradigms and
>> extend
>> > their frameworks if you want more than they do. Further, these
>> frameworks
>> > are heavy weight, so doing just what you need in GWT will be much
>> faster
>> > performance wise. This is why we stick with pure GWT on my team and why
>> > another dev team in our company wanted to jump off a cliff after
>> building a
>> > 400 screen app in GXT.
>> >
>> >
>> > Sincerely,
>> > Joseph
>> >
>> > --
>> > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
>> Groups
>> > "Google Web Toolkit" group.
>> > To view this discussion on the web visit
>> > https://groups.google.com/d/**msg/google-web-toolkit/-/**yKJ3UnRqsMMJ.
>>
>> > To post to this group, send email to google-we...@**googlegroups.com.
>> > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
>> > google-web-toolkit+**unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
>> > For more options, visit this group at
>> > http://groups.google.com/**group/google-web-toolkit?hl=en
>> **.
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Alfredo Quiroga-Villamil
>>
>> AOL/Yahoo/Gmail/MSN IM:  lawwton
>>
>  --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "Google Web Toolkit" group.
> To view this discussion on the web visit
> https://groups.google.com/d/msg/google-web-toolkit/-/cwQkn1O8OgcJ.
>
> To post to this group, send email to google-web-toolkit@googlegroups.com.
> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> google-web-toolkit+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
> For more options, visit this group at
> http://groups.google.com/group/google-web-toolkit?hl=en.
>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Google Web Toolkit" group.
To post to this group, send email to google-web-toolkit@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, se

Re: GWT vs SmartGWT

[Sebastián Gurin]

Also, besides Joseph said (it is true in my case), there is a fundamental 
difference and it is that vaadin, smartGWT, etc uses an architecture where 
they depend on server side stuff. For example, all vaading Java code runs 
in the serverside, and the webapp is rendered 100% on the serverside. The 
widgets depend on this server side for rendering and there is client-server 
comunication for rendering, layouting, events, etc. 

In pure GWT, you are not dependent on a certain serverside technology, you 
could use php, java container or even no serverside at all. 

Also, I have found difficult to interoperate between technologies like 
vaadin and smartGWT with 3rd party JavaScript widgets, or even with "normal 
GWT ". 

Regards

On Tuesday, October 30, 2012 9:38:30 AM UTC-2, Alfredo Quiroga-Villamil 
wrote:
>
> I've seen in the past many comments and different opinions about 
> Vaadin, GXT, SmartGWT and "GWT-only" apps. I think the fundamental 
> thing to remember here is resources. 
>
> If you work for a company where you can afford to have the designer/s, 
> a CSS savy person/s and the time to build and enhance more than 
> anything pure GWT widgets then by all means go with the GWT only 
> approach. Do that also if you know the app is being built and will be 
> there to stay for a loog time. 
>
> However,  in many cases we all seem to think that those frameworks 
> only provide cosmetic things and they really don't. They actually 
> provide a whole lot more than just style. Not all "GWT-only" widgets, 
> but many actually need a lot of work in both how they look as well as 
> how they are used programmatically. 
>
> Not too long ago I set out to build a pure GWT app (one man app only 
> and being built by someone, me in this case that have been building 
> GWT for quite some time) and I was the one that almost jumped off the 
> building in this case. I found myself, styling things, some of the 
> widgets needed a lot of extra boiler plate (take Cell Table for 
> instance), just to do basic stuff that using some of the other 
> frameworks mentioned would just be one or a few lines of code. 
>
> So if you have to make a decision, think about one thing and one thing 
> only. Do you truly have the resources/time, both design and coding 
> wise to enhance the existing GWT widgets? The answer to that will 
> likely tell you what to use and it's likely the reason why those 
> companies are such "value-add" to the existing GWT code base. 
>
> As far as performance goes, unless you are building an App for 
> something extremely, and I emphasize extremely demanding, there is 
> little to none chance that using GXT, Vaadin or SmartGWT will have an 
> actual impact on your app. 
>
> Alfredo 
>
> On Mon, Oct 29, 2012 at 8:01 PM, Joseph Lust 
> > 
> wrote: 
> > Folks in my company were just asking me this the other day. If you want 
> an 
> > app that looks like the GXT or SmartGWT showcase, and absolutely nothing 
> > more, then use them. But you'll have to bend to their paradigms and 
> extend 
> > their frameworks if you want more than they do. Further, these 
> frameworks 
> > are heavy weight, so doing just what you need in GWT will be much faster 
> > performance wise. This is why we stick with pure GWT on my team and why 
> > another dev team in our company wanted to jump off a cliff after 
> building a 
> > 400 screen app in GXT. 
> > 
> > 
> > Sincerely, 
> > Joseph 
> > 
> > -- 
> > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google 
> Groups 
> > "Google Web Toolkit" group. 
> > To view this discussion on the web visit 
> > https://groups.google.com/d/msg/google-web-toolkit/-/yKJ3UnRqsMMJ. 
> > To post to this group, send email to 
> > google-we...@googlegroups.com. 
>
> > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
> > google-web-toolkit+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com . 
> > For more options, visit this group at 
> > http://groups.google.com/group/google-web-toolkit?hl=en. 
>
>
>
> -- 
> Alfredo Quiroga-Villamil 
>
> AOL/Yahoo/Gmail/MSN IM:  lawwton 
>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Google Web Toolkit" group.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/google-web-toolkit/-/cwQkn1O8OgcJ.
To post to this group, send email to google-web-toolkit@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
google-web-toolkit+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/google-web-toolkit?hl=en.

Re: GWT vs SmartGWT

[Alfredo Quiroga-Villamil]

I've seen in the past many comments and different opinions about
Vaadin, GXT, SmartGWT and "GWT-only" apps. I think the fundamental
thing to remember here is resources.

If you work for a company where you can afford to have the designer/s,
a CSS savy person/s and the time to build and enhance more than
anything pure GWT widgets then by all means go with the GWT only
approach. Do that also if you know the app is being built and will be
there to stay for a loog time.

However,  in many cases we all seem to think that those frameworks
only provide cosmetic things and they really don't. They actually
provide a whole lot more than just style. Not all "GWT-only" widgets,
but many actually need a lot of work in both how they look as well as
how they are used programmatically.

Not too long ago I set out to build a pure GWT app (one man app only
and being built by someone, me in this case that have been building
GWT for quite some time) and I was the one that almost jumped off the
building in this case. I found myself, styling things, some of the
widgets needed a lot of extra boiler plate (take Cell Table for
instance), just to do basic stuff that using some of the other
frameworks mentioned would just be one or a few lines of code.

So if you have to make a decision, think about one thing and one thing
only. Do you truly have the resources/time, both design and coding
wise to enhance the existing GWT widgets? The answer to that will
likely tell you what to use and it's likely the reason why those
companies are such "value-add" to the existing GWT code base.

As far as performance goes, unless you are building an App for
something extremely, and I emphasize extremely demanding, there is
little to none chance that using GXT, Vaadin or SmartGWT will have an
actual impact on your app.

Alfredo

On Mon, Oct 29, 2012 at 8:01 PM, Joseph Lust  wrote:
> Folks in my company were just asking me this the other day. If you want an
> app that looks like the GXT or SmartGWT showcase, and absolutely nothing
> more, then use them. But you'll have to bend to their paradigms and extend
> their frameworks if you want more than they do. Further, these frameworks
> are heavy weight, so doing just what you need in GWT will be much faster
> performance wise. This is why we stick with pure GWT on my team and why
> another dev team in our company wanted to jump off a cliff after building a
> 400 screen app in GXT.
>
>
> Sincerely,
> Joseph
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "Google Web Toolkit" group.
> To view this discussion on the web visit
> https://groups.google.com/d/msg/google-web-toolkit/-/yKJ3UnRqsMMJ.
> To post to this group, send email to google-web-toolkit@googlegroups.com.
> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> google-web-toolkit+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
> For more options, visit this group at
> http://groups.google.com/group/google-web-toolkit?hl=en.



-- 
Alfredo Quiroga-Villamil

AOL/Yahoo/Gmail/MSN IM:  lawwton

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Google Web Toolkit" group.
To post to this group, send email to google-web-toolkit@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
google-web-toolkit+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/google-web-toolkit?hl=en.

Re: GWT vs SmartGWT

[Joseph Lust]

Folks in my company were just asking me this the other day. If you want an 
app that looks like the GXT or SmartGWT showcase, and absolutely nothing 
more, then use them. But you'll have to bend to their paradigms and extend 
their frameworks if you want more than they do. Further, these frameworks 
are heavy weight, so doing just what you need in GWT will be much faster 
performance wise. This is why we stick with pure GWT on my team and why 
another dev team in our company wanted to jump off a cliff after building a 
400 screen app in GXT.


Sincerely,
Joseph

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Google Web Toolkit" group.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/google-web-toolkit/-/yKJ3UnRqsMMJ.
To post to this group, send email to google-web-toolkit@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
google-web-toolkit+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/google-web-toolkit?hl=en.

Re: GWT vs SmartGWT

[Brett Freer]

I agree with Benjamin. I would add though that if the standard widgets are 
not a good fit for your requirements, then it is worth seriously looking at 
Sencha GXT (Ext-GWT) as well.

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Google Web Toolkit" group.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/google-web-toolkit/-/32p-SeiTC1oJ.
To post to this group, send email to google-web-toolkit@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
google-web-toolkit+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/google-web-toolkit?hl=en.

Re: GWT vs SmartGWT

[Benjamin Possolo]

I recommend straight GWT for almost everything. The other frameworks just 
add abstractions on top of GWT that confuse things a lot more.

Designing screens: UI Binder
Client-side validation: Editor framework + JSR303 validation using 
HibernateValidator 4.0.2GA
Performance: AsyncProxy, ClientBundle, stick to concrete collections in 
data transfer objects, etc
Communicate with server over WSDL: you are kind of fucked on this one. I 
don't know why you would want your javascript to talk WSDL with a server. 
While I appreciate SOAP/WSDL, that is just way too much overhead for your 
javascript client to deal with. Your server's WSDL layer likely uses some 
sort of business interface written in Java. Create a new backend endpoint 
using REST or for even easier GWT-integration using GWT-RPC. This endpoint 
should just reuse the same business interface that your WSDL endpoint uses.

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Google Web Toolkit" group.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/google-web-toolkit/-/LewlhrMuFccJ.
To post to this group, send email to google-web-toolkit@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
google-web-toolkit+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/google-web-toolkit?hl=en.

GWT vs SmartGWT

[kumar thatikonda]

Hi All,
   Can you please let me know which of the option( GWT or SmartGWT) is 
better, considering the below scenario.

  1. Will be used for designing screens and client-side validations.
  2. Performance ( page loading , grid loading) should be good.
  3. Need to communicate with server through wsdls(web services.)
  

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Google Web Toolkit" group.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/google-web-toolkit/-/0cy5zPyJUqoJ.
To post to this group, send email to google-web-toolkit@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
google-web-toolkit+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/google-web-toolkit?hl=en.

GWT vs SmartGWT

[kumar thatikonda]

Hi All,
   Please let me know which one is better(GWT or SmartGWT) for developing a 
web application considering the below scenario.

1. Will use only for developing the screens and client side validations.
2. Needs to communicate with server through wsdls.
3. Performance (initial screen loading time, loading data into grids...) 
should be good.

Can you please tell the option(GWT or SmartGWT) and the advantage 
of choosing it.


 

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Google Web Toolkit" group.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/google-web-toolkit/-/ynQTzCvVWAEJ.
To post to this group, send email to google-web-toolkit@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
google-web-toolkit+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/google-web-toolkit?hl=en.