I think you are fixated on the number of components that are available in vaadin too much. Vaadin and GWT in general have to have their own components for everything because everything is built n JavaScript. Tapestry can get away with using plain HTML for both things so it's not really a valid comparison. Saying that vaadin and GWT in general do have nice components that are richer than some of the tapestry ones.
Personally I like to stick with the simpler approach on the client, I.e. tapestry. When I need one of those fancy components that are available on vaadin, GWT or smartgwt, I just use those on the tapestry page using the multiple available integration libraries. Both of these solution are vastly different and there is not a real direct simple comparison that you are trying to make. Each one is applicable for different circumstances. Good thing is that you can integrate vaadin or GWT components into tapestry pages. On Aug 11, 2012, at 2:30 PM, Muhammad Gelbana <m.gelb...@gmail.com> wrote: > So is there any Vaadin users already using tapestry5 too and could give me > a comparison based on his experience ? > > I've never used Vaadin but what I can say about it after I visited it's > website is that it's much more UI component rich when compared to tapestry > but it has no IoC support. Of course the lack of UI components in t5 can be > mitigated by using external libraries\frameworks but I'm comparing based on > the OTB features that requires no efforts to import. > > I see it as: > > Vaadin + IoC = Tapestry5 + GWT (But still Vaadin will have more UI > components OTB) > > What do you think ? > > -- > *Regards,* > *Muhammad Gelbana > Java Developer* --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@tapestry.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@tapestry.apache.org
