Apple to drop WebObjects in Snow Leopard Server

2

Comments

  • Reply 21 of 52
    jlm808jlm808 Posts: 4member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by ziljr View Post


    I wonder why Apple uses WebObjects so much, when no one else does?



    Were the engineers given a choice among all the options, and did they choose WebObjects over the others? Or were they forced to use it because it was an Apple product?



    Also, it would seem likely that the number of developers familiar with WebObjects at Apple would be higher than elsewhere.



    What exactly does WebObjects offer that Struts or other Java web application stacks don't?



    In my own experience, it has had a huge tendency to "forget" open sockets (in CLOSE_WAIT) when placed under heavy loads . I've not seen that with any other application stacks.



    Of course Apple employees would have been inclined to use WebObjects considering they created it.



    WebObjects scales well as is evidenced by the Apple Online Store and iTunes - so I'm not sure what you mean by open sockets - I've never heard that complaint before.



    The crown jewel of WebObjects is the Enterprise Object Framework (EOF) which is, IMHO, the best way to work with a relational database. If you never been interested in WebObjects before you should check out the documentation at Apple dot com.
  • Reply 22 of 52
    dr millmossdr millmoss Posts: 5,403member
    I'm remembering a few eons ago, Steve extolling the virtues of WebObjects during one of his keynotes, talking about how Apple used it for the Apple Store, and saying that at Apple "we eat our own dog food." I may totally lack the technical competence to comment on the value of WebObjects, but I did think at the time that this wasn't one of Steve's more persuasive sales pitches.
  • Reply 23 of 52
    iphone1982iphone1982 Posts: 109member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by tcdent View Post


    And they don't distribute QuickTime, or iTunes, or Safari, or the numerous server admin and developer tools for free either?



    OK, they do but who uses Safari or when was the last link you hit for Video was QuickTime?



    Both failed projects by Apple. 88% Don't use Mac's OS, and FLASH is on 92% of ALL computers world wide.



    I'm hoping you see my point. If you don't then "Go APPLE".



    They have screwed up more partnerships than I can count in the last 20 years and not one of Apple's standards has been mainstream for more than a couple years.



    Flash is the video standard for the web. Apple can't accept this.



    APPLE YOU LOSE VIDEO ON THE WEB, QUICKTIME IS A MINORITY JOKE.



    Get off your ass and give something I can view on every website I go to INCLUDING MY FRICKING IPHONE.
  • Reply 24 of 52
    johnqhjohnqh Posts: 242member
    Moving WebObjects from Obj-C to Java was a stupid move.



    Of course, then, they were two languages that nobody uses and Java seemed to have more potential



    As of now, we still get a lot of Java programmers writing server code, but none of them are interested in Apple technologies. On the other hand, Apple gained 10's of thousands of Obj-C programmers who are developing for iPhone, and they will soon stop when they realize iPhone is not the gold mine. A lot of them would have turned to WebObjects if it is still available for Obj-C.
  • Reply 25 of 52
    vito_webvito_web Posts: 9member
    Quote:

    Moving WebObjects from Obj-C to Java was a stupid move.



    Absolutely correct!



    If Apple would not move Obj-C to Java, I personally would use it and not RoR and PHP for web development.

    But Java sucks, and will fade away from this world like microsoft is fading.

    In spite of Apple I would create a simplified language for web development (I mean scripting lanaguage) based on Obj-C with its syntax etc... and an Apache handler like PHP has and of course an entire set of web development tools based on XCode, then everybody would be happy in Mac OS X development community (at least me)
  • Reply 26 of 52
    agaaga Posts: 42member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by vito_web View Post


    Absolutely correct!



    If Apple would not move Obj-C to Java, I personally would use it and not RoR and PHP for web development.

    But Java sucks, and will fade away from this world like microsoft is fading.

    In spite of Apple I would create a simplified language for web development (I mean scripting lanaguage) based on Obj-C with its syntax etc... and an Apache handler like PHP has and of course an entire set of web development tools based on XCode, then everybody would be happy in Mac OS X development community (at least me)



    Agreed
  • Reply 27 of 52
    oc4theooc4theo Posts: 294member
    My take is that Apple is not abandoning WebObjects and never will. I think Apple wants to make it less available so it can capitalize on it. Like Steve Jobs prophesied; the web is where the money will be made. Apple is already making tons of money from it. And yes, Apple wants to keep this money making machine to itself. That is the plan!
  • Reply 28 of 52
    agaaga Posts: 42member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by iPhone1982 View Post


    OK, they do but who uses Safari or when was the last link you hit for Video was QuickTime?



    Both failed projects by Apple. 88% Don't use Mac's OS, and FLASH is on 92% of ALL computers world wide.



    I'm hoping you see my point. If you don't then "Go APPLE".



    They have screwed up more partnerships than I can count in the last 20 years and not one of Apple's standards has been mainstream for more than a couple years.



    Flash is the video standard for the web. Apple can't accept this.



    APPLE YOU LOSE VIDEO ON THE WEB, QUICKTIME IS A MINORITY JOKE.



    Get off your ass and give something I can view on every website I go to INCLUDING MY FRICKING IPHONE.



    I use Safari.

    Most links I hit for video work with QuickTime.



    Both Failed projects by Apple? ROTFL. You don't know what you are talking about. Safari - profitable for Apple. Webkit under the hood, very successful. QuickTime, again, profitable for Apple. Used in many devices and software. http://webkit.org/ for some safari guts inf.



    LOL, 88% don't use Mac's OS. 88% don't use Window's OS. Logic is in 100% of computers world wide but doesn't mean users gain any.



    Don't see your point, and not sure why that means "Go APPLE."



    As if Microsoft hasn't screwed up more relationships than I care to count in the last 20 years too.



    An Apple standard mainstreamed for man years for you: 1394 / firewire and QuickTime

    Apple mainstreamed other standards like USB, CD/DVD drives, UTP RJ45 ethernet

    Apple also killed people with Apple standards like all the different Apple Display Connectors thru the years.



    Flash is not the video standard for the web. Sorry you can't accept this.



    BE CAREFUL, YOU WILL GET YOURSELF IN TROUBLE PICKING ON MINORITIES!



    Your last sentence does not make sense. I guess you want flash, to watch your web videos, which you can watch in h.264 if you like. Go look at the history of Flash and Video and how that relates to certain QuickTime codecs, and you might have part of your Flash answer.
  • Reply 29 of 52
    mdriftmeyermdriftmeyer Posts: 7,503member
    I'm interested in seeing how this one falls out.
  • Reply 30 of 52
    WebObjects isn't part of the operating system, and never was.



    Apple has long since kicked WebObjects development support out of Xcode, but that's not relevant to Snow Leopard Server, or anything-Server, because as a rule you'd develop on a client machine, and when deploying what you'd built on eg MacOSX Server, you'd need only the runtime support. WebObjects these days is Java, so if you had to you could develop without a GUI. Or you could use the recommended solution, which these days is Eclipse.



    Since WebObjects is Java, these days you can deploy anywhere there's a Java 5 VM or better. You just need to install the runtime support, which is Java, if you are not deploying on MacOSX Server. Oh, and maybe you need to build a native API adaptor module for your HTTP daemon, such as Apache 1.3.x, Apache 2.x.y, or Microsoft Internet Information Server. You get given C source code for the native API adaptors for common webservers, so while you need to build one yourself, this is not problematic. The native API adaptor modules project also includes, or included, MacOSX startup items or launch daemon configuration plists. While rc scripts for the likes of Solaris and Linux are not included, there's enough information for you to create your own.



    So if WebObjects continues to exist -- and from the story it appears it will, and as far as I know Apple are still recruiting WebObjects developers -- all that's likely to be being removed from a default installation of Snow Leopard Server is the WebObjects deployment support, which around 99.8% of Xserve/MacOSX Server customers never use, making the default OS installation that tiny bit smaller. The remaining 0.2% of customers will presumably be put out by having to spend well over 15 minutes installing the WebObjects runtime support themselves, just like customers deploying on non-MacOSX do, 15 minutes that could have been better spent watching South Park or something.



    What a non-story.



    "Apple to omit WebObjects runtime support from Snow Leopard Server default installation" might have been a more accurate title, but less catchy. "Apple to drop WebObjects in Snow Leopard Server" on the other hand is pretty good flamebait.
  • Reply 31 of 52
    rhowarthrhowarth Posts: 144member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by vito_web View Post


    But Java sucks, and will fade away from this world like microsoft is fading.



    Right. You might have inside information that companies like Google, IBM and Oracle and the many, many others that have businesses that depend on Java and actively support Java development are all about to go out of business overnight, but otherwise I rather doubt it. There are literally millions of Java developers out there, and plenty of people who no more want to be tied in to a closed and proprietary Objective C/Cocoa environment than they do into a Win32/.NET one.
  • Reply 32 of 52
    jlljll Posts: 2,713member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by leeharveyosmond View Post


    WebObjects isn't part of the operating system, and never was.



    Apple has long since kicked WebObjects development support out of Xcode, but that's not relevant to Snow Leopard Server, or anything-Server, because as a rule you'd develop on a client machine, and when deploying what you'd built on eg MacOSX Server, you'd need only the runtime support. WebObjects these days is Java, so if you had to you could develop without a GUI. Or you could use the recommended solution, which these days is Eclipse.



    Since WebObjects is Java, these days you can deploy anywhere there's a Java 5 VM or better. You just need to install the runtime support, which is Java, if you are not deploying on MacOSX Server. Oh, and maybe you need to build a native API adaptor module for your HTTP daemon, such as Apache 1.3.x, Apache 2.x.y, or Microsoft Internet Information Server. You get given C source code for the native API adaptors for common webservers, so while you need to build one yourself, this is not problematic. The native API adaptor modules project also includes, or included, MacOSX startup items or launch daemon configuration plists. While rc scripts for the likes of Solaris and Linux are not included, there's enough information for you to create your own.



    So if WebObjects continues to exist -- and from the story it appears it will, and as far as I know Apple are still recruiting WebObjects developers -- all that's likely to be being removed from a default installation of Snow Leopard Server is the WebObjects deployment support, which around 99.8% of Xserve/MacOSX Server customers never use, making the default OS installation that tiny bit smaller. The remaining 0.2% of customers will presumably be put out by having to spend well over 15 minutes installing the WebObjects runtime support themselves, just like customers deploying on non-MacOSX do, 15 minutes that could have been better spent watching South Park or something.



    What a non-story.



    "Apple to omit WebObjects runtime support from Snow Leopard Server default installation" might have been a more accurate title, but less catchy. "Apple to drop WebObjects in Snow Leopard Server" on the other hand is pretty good flamebait.



    It seems that someone read this:



    Quote:

    What?s New in Web Service

    Web service in Mac OS X v10.6 offers major enhancements in several key areas:



    ? Apache Modules: mod_python and mod_xsendfile improve web-based application

    support and scripting.



    ? WebObjects: Support for WebObjects is removed with Mac OS X v10.6.



    And made their own conclusion.
  • Reply 33 of 52
    jragostajragosta Posts: 10,473member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Mr Beardsley View Post


    Unfortunately the writing has been on the wall for WO for quite a while now. It was unfortunate that Apple moved it off of Obj-C and over onto Java. WO had an absolutely great architecture, and had extremely powerful set of tools. EOF was the forerunner to today's CoreData, and did an awesome job of abstracting away whatever database solution you were using.



    I hope that with the renewed interest in Objective-C and cocoa due to iPhone development we will see Cocoa expanded to fill in the gap left by WO. I'm afraid we won't, but one can always hope!



    I'm not a developer, but I read pretty extensively about WebObjects when it came out. It seemed like a powerful technology which was far superior in many ways to what was available at the time in terms of scalability and ease of use (once you got over a substantial learning curve, IIRC). Unfortunately, it never caught on - whether due to lack of interest from developers or lack of promotion from Apple, I don't know.



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by iPhone1982 View Post


    That's a good one...



    Apple giving something away for free. Made my night.



    You're really out of touch. Apple gives away a LOT of free stuff. Can you say 'Darwin'? Apple has a large and active group working on open source technologies. Unfortunately, people like you never give them credit for what they do.



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by ziljr View Post


    I wonder why Apple uses WebObjects so much, when no one else does?



    Were the engineers given a choice among all the options, and did they choose WebObjects over the others? Or were they forced to use it because it was an Apple product?



    Also, it would seem likely that the number of developers familiar with WebObjects at Apple would be higher than elsewhere.



    What exactly does WebObjects offer that Struts or other Java web application stacks don't?.



    My understanding was that it offered better scalability and performance than Java. You wouldn't want to build a store like the Apple Store in Java, but it worked well with WO. I don't know about Struts.
  • Reply 34 of 52
    vineavinea Posts: 5,585member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Prince View Post


    Well it's nice to see you've calmed down from "terrible article!" to just splitting hairs in order to make your original position sound correct. If Snow Leopard Server ships without WebObjects, it's because Apple dropped it. Which is what the article is reporting. Apple is dropping WO from SLS.



    It has to do with your assertion that "WO is disappearing" and "Apple is simply reserving WebObjects for its own use". Neither of which are true unless Apple really is discontinuing WO for external developers.



    There is also no indication that "However, the release of Snow Leopard Server will end official support for WebObjects deployment on the Mac" if WO still has a deployment kit for SLS and the only change is that it's not installed by default in SLS.



    Given that WO deploys to any web server with a recent rev of Java this seems really unlikely. And you also don't note in your history that WO only started being included in Tiger Server.



    Quote:

    There's no need for you to lie to support your position. If you think this article is inaccurate and/or plagiarizing another source, please be an adult and simply point out what offends you. But don't insinuate claims you can't back up. Your comments are irresponsible and rude. And inaccurate, as I pointed out.



    That might be fun to do, but what does third party WO tool development have to do with Apple dropping WebObjects in Snow Leopard Server?



    It's called "research" before you make sensationalistic assertions. That WO deployment is being pulled from SLS is one thing. That WO is disappearing/reserved for internal use is another.



    It's called not just using google as your only research tool and calling it a "source". If you had talked with WOCommunity.org, you might have been told they've known since June and discussed it. You might have even talked to Mike Schrag who has a bit of visibility into Apple's WO plans and had a more balanced piece. Nah...too hard I guess.



    Heck, there are now two WOWODCs. I guess one for each WO dev. I keed I keed. Actually, from what I heard, quite a few more Apple devs showed up this year.
  • Reply 35 of 52
    jasenj1jasenj1 Posts: 922member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by vito_web View Post


    But Java sucks, and will fade away from this world like microsoft is fading.



    Java's syntax is getting long in the tooth. Scripting languages like Python and Ruby have adopted some innovative things that make Java look geriatric these days. However, the JVM is very solid. Jython and JRuby let those scripting languages run nicely on the JVM. Groovy brings much of the power and convenience of modern scripting languages to Java in a very Java-programmer friendly way.



    On topic:

    I think WebObjects got hit with the Apple stigma. Apple's never been taken seriously by the IT crowd that runs corporate infrastructure. Thus WO could be 10 times better that ASP or RoR or whatever, but corporations would never adopt it. I think spinning WO off to a separate company and/or open sourcing it MIGHT help increase its popularity. But the market is fairly crowded these days.



    - Jasen.
  • Reply 36 of 52
    Quote:

    Right. You might have inside information that companies like Google, IBM and Oracle and the many, many others that have businesses that depend on Java and actively support Java development are all about to go out of business overnight, but otherwise I rather doubt it. There are literally millions of Java developers out there, and plenty of people who no more want to be tied in to a closed and proprietary Objective C/Cocoa environment than they do into a Win32/.NET one.



    I am very informed of Java usage these days, I was developing with java for some years, but all I can tell is "Java SUCKS", and it does not matter what companies use it IBM, whatever, they use it because they built all their business infrastructure on it in old days and now it would cost them billions to move to another language/tech.



    Microsoft also is a big company, but as you see it suck, it sucked with Vista, it will such with windows 7.

    I don't know who is using windows nowadays for serious work and productivity. I don't belive that Apple could not create a new (may be scripting) language to dominate the Web Development. Take a look back at 2005 when they had just some users with OSX, but now with Leopard, they changed users' mind, the same happened with iPhone, Nokia and Palm was the best known, dominants, but they suck so ..... it does not make difference with java too and how many people (millions or just one) are using technologies we have, everything is changing.
  • Reply 37 of 52
    gudingudin Posts: 7member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by jasenj1 View Post


    I think WebObjects got hit with the Apple stigma. Apple's never been taken seriously by the IT crowd that runs corporate infrastructure. Thus WO could be 10 times better that ASP or RoR or whatever, but corporations would never adopt it. I think spinning WO off to a separate company and/or open sourcing it MIGHT help increase its popularity. But the market is fairly crowded these days.



    - Jasen.



    WO actually IS better than many competing technologies, and keeps getting better. I agree with the posters who say the title of this article basically is flamebait, and is misleading. However, because of Apple's marketing, it's at least a bit understandable.



    Apple could care less if you use WO. THEY use it, and make buckets of cash with all of the advantages it gives them. It underlies virtually everything they do, online and off. iTunes? WO. The app and the store. Apple.com? WO. MobileMe? WO under the surface (you know, the part that worked from the outset, as opposed to the Sproutcore UI that was buggy). Their internal supply and logistics apps? WO. Every dollar they make goes through WO.



    The problem with WO of late is that it's development was tied internally to the development of the OS, despite the fact that it is completely independent. This change is simply indicating that WO is no longer tied to the OS and its release schedule. If you install WO by default with every OS X server, then installs of the server may not be getting the latest version of WO. If it's a separate install, they will. WO 5.5 can come out when it's ready, and not have to wait or to hurry for Snow Leopard Server. WO 5.6, or 6 or whatever they decide to call the next major release can come out at Christmas, in the Spring, or whenever else, based on when IT is ready.



    WO is actually stronger now than it has been in many years, both inside Apple and outside. Apple doesn't make a major push to sell it, because selling it does not make them money. Selling products through WO apps makes them virtually every dollar they make. So no, WO is not going away. Apple is hiring people to work on WO, and to develop with WO, because it is a major advantage for them. If you develop in WO, then develop in Struts, Hibernate, and even RoR, you will appreciate how big of an advantage WO is.



    Yeah, Apple's wording that Snow Leopard Server is "dropping support" is seriously bad PR, but they just don't care about that. You CAN install and run WO apps on Snow Leopard Server, and on Windows, and Linux, and anything else that has an up to date JVM. You can develop on all those platforms as well. That of course why they went to Java.



    I, myself, prefer Obj-C, but for this, Java makes more sense. Many non-Apple apps use WO, and will continue to do so, and many of these would not be up and running if it required an Apple-branded server. Then of course, Apple would have to spend money developing the tools, and the support apps for the server, when there are already existing Java servers out there and deployed that a WO app can just drop onto.



    The WO community is bigger and stronger than ever before, and they are in general WILDLY HAPPY that WO will be developed based on it's own schedule. So Apple wants to keep developing WO, let the robust WOCommunity continue to develop the tools and provide support for those tools. Unlike RoR, .NET and most other technologies, and the WO dev lists, and the WOnder list, etc are ridiculously helpful, immediately.
  • Reply 38 of 52
    gudingudin Posts: 7member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by iPhone1982 View Post


    That's a good one...



    Apple giving something away for free. Made my night.



    They do distribute WO for free outside of SLS.
  • Reply 39 of 52
    libertyforalllibertyforall Posts: 1,398member
    Well, you must mean a PAID developer account, as the free account has no 5.5 tools available...





    Quote:
    Originally Posted by jlm808 View Post


    This article is not worth the paper it isn't written on.



    If you have a developer account with Apple you can download the following:



    WebObjects and Java Developer Support for Snow Leopard build 10A286

    Includes WebObjects 5.5 (next version).



    so much for your source.



  • Reply 40 of 52
    gudingudin Posts: 7member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by libertyforall View Post


    Well, you must mean a PAID developer account, as the free account has no 5.5 tools available...



    5.5 is the NEXT version, so yeah, probably what he means, as you'd need access to pre-release software. You obviously can't download SLS either without such an account, so it's largely a moot point.



    You CAN however, download 5.4.3, the CURRENT version with a free account. Regardless, you can download Eclipse and WOLips for free, and develop WO apps for free using those open source tools, and you can do it on any platform with a recent JDK.



    You can also deploy on any platform with a recent JVM.



    The only thing that this changes is that the WO frameworks are not installed by default on SLS. They can be installed by anyone that wants them.



    They are no longer tied to the OS release schedule, and as a result, new versions will most likely be coming out more quickly. The frameworks are also likely to be more closely tied to WOnder, and more unified. All good things for any WO developer.
Sign In or Register to comment.