Sig1, > the integration between EJB and EOF wasn't exactly > complete or very usable.
I'd agree. They are vastly different. A friend of mine had a good analogy about trying to get these technologies to work together. He said it was like the South Park episode when they tried to cross breed a pig with an elephant. I've seen examples of wrapping EOF editing context in EJB Session facades, but the design definitely wasn't efficient. It's has nothing to do with EOF specifically, but how EJB works with fine grained objects. > you are locked into Apple's dev tools and build system This isn't true anymore. You can use Eclipse for WO development and ant as a build process. http://objectstyle.org/woproject/ > prefered databases and prefered platforms etc. As of May they > still weren't supporting Oracle 9i (only 8i) I would classify this as an drawback of EOF, not the application server. You don't have to use EOF in a WebObjects app (you could use straight JDBC, or other 3rd party O/R frameworks). > The foundation classes are analogous to the Java Collections but are not > anywhere as complete. Wow, this one we really disagree on. I've always found it to be the other way around. Curious why you would say that? Their foundation stuff is pretty mature. e. > -----Original Message----- > From: Sig1 [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Wednesday, September 11, 2002 12:11 PM > To: Struts Users Mailing List > Subject: RE: Apple Web Objects > > > > As I remember from Apple's developer conference (WWDC) - the > integration > between EJB and EOF wasn't exactly complete or very usable. > The impression I > got was that OpenEJB was added so that WebObjects appeared to > be in the J2EE > camp - so one could make a case for WebObjects if management > was pushing for > industry standards or was questioning the vendor lockin > issues. Thus there > integration was minimal and their IDE where not up to speed, > with WebObjects > you are locked into Apple's dev tools and build system - > granted where there > is a strong will there is a way... Basically, if you are using WO you > shouldn't be doing EJB/servlets - EJB and WO are completely > different and > don't mesh well (or at least in a way one can easily > understand). WO does it > own load balancing, own CMP, etc. and thus doesn't mesh with WO. > I found some of the presenters at WWDC very ant-EJB and > JSP/servlets (one > presenter spent a good deal of time deriding EJB/servlets as overly > complicated). During QA I asked if it was possible to have a > hybrid EJB/EOF > application - answer was basically no. Furthermore, you can't > mix and match > jsp with that custom editor used to build forms. > As for there ability to turn a WebObjects application into a > J2EE application > - they wrap the WO application in a servlet which with the > way they do it, > means you can't do load balancing among other things. > WO is a black box and the documentation isn't there for the > more advanced > features - furthermore, new WebObject's releases have the > habit of breaking WO > applications. Unlike the J2EE platform, you don't have specifications, > roadmaps etc. - just the whims of Apple. According to a rep, > most WO users are > still using release 4.5 or older as they have substantial > Object-C code (it > was only a couple of years ago that Apple ported WebObjects to Java). > Also, when using WO, you have to use their 'foundation > classes' like NSArray > etc. The foundation classes are analogous to the Java > Collections but are not > anywhere as complete. > Don't get me wrong, WO is a very interesting and great > tool/platform. It was > vastly superior to anything several years ago but it hasn't > kept pace. The > vendor lockin with respect to tools and deployment > environment poses a severe > limitation. You maybe able to deploy your WO application in > tomcat but without > Apple's tools editing/changing it isn't easy if even > possible. The windows > tools tend to lag behind that of the Mac tools and Apple > provides you with > special database drivers (unless you want to write your own). > So there are > prefered databases and prefered platforms etc. As of May they > still weren't > supporting Oracle 9i (only 8i). > In my opinion the negative aspects of WO far outweight any > benefit unless > you are already supporting WO applications. > -Ryan > Note, Struts is not a natural fit for WO. > > > > On Wed, 11 Sep 2002 09:20:21 -0500 David Blevins > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Hi Adrian, > > > > Just wanted to add a note about WebObjects and > > EJBs. Apple has been > > using OpenEJB to support EJBs since WebObjects > > 5.1. So, you can write > > all the EJB 1.1 beans that you want and they > > will interoperate from > > WebObjects' EOF and other parts of WebObjects. > > > > If you look at the WebObjects' "Tech Spec" > > page, OpenEJB, OpenORB, and > > Tyrex are listed, but they don't give URLs, so > > here they are: > > http://openejb.sourceforge.net > > http://openorb.sourceforge.net/ > > http://tyrex.sourceforge.net/ > > > > Regards, > > David > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: Adrian Brown > > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > > Sent: Tuesday, September 10, 2002 7:59 PM > > > To: Struts Users Mailing List > > > Subject: Apple Web Objects > > > > > > > > > Noting the spirit of open comment and > > criticism on > > > Struts-alternative products in the J2EE > > community, I was > > > mildly surprised to search the archives of > > theserverside and > > > the Struts users list and find no reference > > to 'Apple Web Objects'. > > > > > > I was wondering if anyone had come across > > them in > > > their travels. Their WYSIWYG approach is > > attractive, > > > throwing away servlets and jsps does worry me > > but if > > > it is still Java then it is still preferable > > to .Net, > > > right? I may even be able to keep my EJBs ... > > > > > > > > At US$1500 for a licence, is it worth looking > > into > > > further? > > > > > > > > > Home page: > > > http://www.apple.com/webobjects > > > > > > Flashy pic: > > > > > http://developer.apple.com/techpubs/webobjects/WebObjectsOverv > > iew/WOHTML/index.html > > > > Thanks, > > > > Adrian > > > > http://mobile.yahoo.com.au - Yahoo! Messenger > > for SMS > > - Now send & receive IMs on your mobile via SMS > > > > -- > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: > > > > For additional commands, e-mail: > > > > > > > > -- > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: > > For additional commands, e-mail: > > > > > > > -- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: > <mailto:struts-user-> [EMAIL PROTECTED]> > For > additional commands, > e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > ********************************************************************** This message, including any attachments, contains confidential information intended for a specific individual and purpose, and is protected by law. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact sender immediately by reply e-mail and destroy all copies. You are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying, or distribution of this message, or the taking of any action based on it, is strictly prohibited. TIAA-CREF ********************************************************************** -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
