How does WebObjects compare to .Net? Everyone in my CS dept. at my University speak of .Net like it's some cutting-edge buzzword. They either love it or hate it, and most seem to love it... ("because it makes things so easy"). I've never developed with .Net, but I've always wondered what open-source or Apple-developed technologies out there compete (or at least complement) it.
Could Apple turn WebObjects into the open-source, more elegant, more innovative .Net alternative?
How does WebObjects compare to .Net? Everyone in my CS dept. at my University speak of .Net like it's some cutting-edge buzzword. They either love it or hate it, and most seem to love it... ("because it makes things so easy"). I've never developed with .Net, but I've always wondered what open-source or Apple-developed technologies out there compete (or at least complement) it.
Could Apple turn WebObjects into the open-source, more elegant, more innovative .Net alternative?
now if the thought of getting a job at Redmond makes you cream your pants, go .Net
if the thought of having to deal with tons of microsoft products virtually 365 days a year, slaving away in front of a Dell box, makes you wish you never did CS at university, then go PHP.
Java and J2EE is another kettle of fish... someone else can chime in on webobjects, j2ee, vs. .Net and PHP
Hey, a fellow Lasso user! I moved to WebObjects from Lasso about 6 years ago. Oh man, Lasso was really cool back then. Haven't really checked it out recently, though.
J2EE, ASP and PHP look really dated when compared to WO. They're probably more suitable for very simple stuff, but for projects above a certain size, WO is the way to go.
So, yeah, try WO - it rules.
my first job out of university - web designer... kinda moved into R&D and impressed the crew in SF Bay Area by using Flash 4 as a form-front-end to Lasso / Filemaker/ Webstar on G4 PowerMacs... mid-late 2000
How does WebObjects compare to .Net? Everyone in my CS dept. at my University speak of .Net like it's some cutting-edge buzzword. They either love it or hate it, and most seem to love it... ("because it makes things so easy"). I've never developed with .Net, but I've always wondered what open-source or Apple-developed technologies out there compete (or at least complement) it.
Could Apple turn WebObjects into the open-source, more elegant, more innovative .Net alternative?
WO is already more elegant, more innovative than .NET . The relevant part of .NET would be ASP.NET, and IMHO, that seems primitive, just looks like Yet Another Scripting Environment? with some added bells and whistles.
One of WOs strongest features is EOF, the Enterprise Object Framework (CoreData's grandpa). It's a persistency framework that allows you to map data sources (usually databases) to Object graphs in your application. EOF abstracts you from having to talk directly to the data source, while in .NET, you'll typically be writing SQL-code to fetch data from a database.
Here's a little secret: I've been working with WO on top of SQL databases for about 6-7 years now (MSSQL Server, Oracle, MySQL, FrontBase) and I've never written a single line of SQL-code in any of my apps. I have absolutely no knowledge of SQL, I just write java code using the EOF.
* WO supported java alongside ObjC back in the NeXT days, and did so up to WO 5.
* Apple lowered the price of WO to $699 in the year 2000.
* WO 5 was shipped in 2001 and was the first release to drop support for ObjC.
Now, ObjC is nice. ObjC is a far better language than java and I used to do all of my programming in ObjC before WO 5. But Java has a lot of momentum behind it, you can hire java programmers of the street (almost literally, these days) and the amount of java class libraries available is stunning. If you're doing web work, java is the way to go, unfortunately, so I think Apple made the right decision to make java their primary focus. For example, I doubt WO sould be offering the really cool web services features WO 5 has if they had stuck with ObjC.
Not to mention, I am deploying my apps across several platforms, problem free. Java is nice that way.
I doubt it. In fact, I believe an open source movement would be more likely to favor java, the simple reason being the sheer size of the java population.
If Apple were to make WO a proprietary vertical solution again, ObjC might be the way to go, but Java is just right, right now.
Wrong.
WebObjects Java Bridge support came after the merger. I know I worked at both places. I had to support WOF in Enterprise Technical Support.
Cocoa WOF stomped the shit out of Java WOF. With Xcode 2.1 and WOF 5.3 I'm just now getting back to reviewing it after the wasted efforts Steve chose to make towards us in the Enterprise Group (The rest of NeXT not in Engineering) and ultimately resulted in many talented people quitting Apple.
I agree the Open Source structure, in the short-term, would favor java but once GCC 4.1 gets the Apple changes it is very easy for the Cocoa WOF to be open-sourced and allow both Darwin and Linux to be deployment as well as Development platforms.
If they do opensource it they need to add some EOFAdaptors codebase for folks to ramp up on.
postgresqlAdaptor, mysqlAdaptor both come to mind.
WebServices is a specification that can be written in any language.
The inherent advantages of ObjC over Java are still prevalent, today and with the advent of Cocoa Bindings, the gap widens.
Apple should first see what the public response is for WOF 5.3 and yes the WOF team has plenty of Cocoa experts on hand as well.
Both Bill Bumgarner and Scott Anguish work at Apple. Hell for all I know they were able to get some of the old French Team back who wrote WOF as a month long project back at NeXT.
If Apple gets serious with EOF that means they are once again serious about the Enterprise.
WebObjects Java Bridge support came after the merger. I know I worked at both places. I had to support WOF in Enterprise Technical Support.
Cocoa WOF stomped the shit out of Java WOF. With Xcode 2.1 and WOF 5.3 I'm just now getting back to reviewing it after the wasted efforts Steve chose to make towards us in the Enterprise Group (The rest of NeXT not in Engineering) and ultimately resulted in many talented people quitting Apple.
I agree the Open Source structure, in the short-term, would favor java but once GCC 4.1 gets the Apple changes it is very easy for the Cocoa WOF to be open-sourced and allow both Darwin and Linux to be deployment as well as Development platforms.
If they do opensource it they need to add some EOFAdaptors codebase for folks to ramp up on.
postgresqlAdaptor, mysqlAdaptor both come to mind.
WebServices is a specification that can be written in any language.
The inherent advantages of ObjC over Java are still prevalent, today and with the advent of Cocoa Bindings, the gap widens.
Apple should first see what the public response is for WOF 5.3 and yes the WOF team has plenty of Cocoa experts on hand as well.
Both Bill Bumgarner and Scott Anguish work at Apple. Hell for all I know they were able to get some of the old French Team back who wrote WOF as a month long project back at NeXT.
If Apple gets serious with EOF that means they are once again serious about the Enterprise.
Time will tell.
Ah yes, the bridge *shudder* certainly came from Apple but WOF 3.0 started java support and that was released by NeXT, right? IMHO, NeXT implemented java "the right way", keeping the java and ObjC implementations separate.
What I meant when I was talking about java helping with the implementation of WebServices is that WO uses Apache's pre-existing Axis library to provide webservices. Just one example of how pre-existing java libraries can help shorten the path to embracing or implementing new technology.
But I do agree that ObjC is a far superior language. I would looove for Apple to reintroduce it to the WO mix, and I'd use it if they did (heck, I'd even like WebScript back, that allowed for some seriously efficient programming). But don't drop support for java, and definitely don't reintroduce the bridge. The fact that back in the WO 4.5 days, many people were using java despite the buggy bridge, is proof that java support is essential.
I didn't know Scott was at Apple now! Perhaps there's hope for ObjC-support with him and bbum on board! I hope so.
"The French team"? Hmmm, was "petite abeille" (can't remember his real name) from the WO lists perhaps rehired by Apple to work on WOF?
"The French team"? Hmmm, was "petite abeille" (can't remember his real name) from the WO lists perhaps rehired by Apple to work on WOF? [/B]
I can confirm "Petite Abeille" is not at Apple at the moment (the names have been changed to protect the Innocent)...unless he was hired in the last 1-2 months.
As for Obj C, this would be one u-turn too much for WO imho.
There are good open-source alternatives (SOPE etc) if people want to go down that route.
I'd love to see Apple open source Web Objects. Where I work, if it's not .Net or open source Java it doesn't get considered. I use a number of open source Java libraries and they're ok, but as a semi-closeted Apple lover, I relish the opportunity to work with some Apple-grown tech. I think it's the limited brain space management types can afford, .Net and J2EE are two choices, throw in a third to keep track of (WO) and confusion sets in.
It's bizarre, it seems like anything with Apple attached to it is given the cold shoulder. I've mentioned Rendevous/Bonjour a couple times and get the dreaded eye-roll and shrug.
Oh well, maybe I'll grab a copy of XCode 2.1, develop some apps in WO and show them to management.
But once you are up to speed with WebObjects, management will think you either have supernatural programming powers or work 18 hours a day
Sssssh, not so loud, you'll let everyone in on our secret .
But yeah, check out WO, WOCode is a good place to start.
Apple's WO mailing list is also filled with helpful people and newbie questions usually get answered quickly (the archives are an indispensable source of knowledge as well).
Comments
So WO is that good huh?
Could Apple turn WebObjects into the open-source, more elegant, more innovative .Net alternative?
Originally posted by bborofka
How does WebObjects compare to .Net? Everyone in my CS dept. at my University speak of .Net like it's some cutting-edge buzzword. They either love it or hate it, and most seem to love it... ("because it makes things so easy"). I've never developed with .Net, but I've always wondered what open-source or Apple-developed technologies out there compete (or at least complement) it.
Could Apple turn WebObjects into the open-source, more elegant, more innovative .Net alternative?
now if the thought of getting a job at Redmond makes you cream your pants, go .Net
if the thought of having to deal with tons of microsoft products virtually 365 days a year, slaving away in front of a Dell box, makes you wish you never did CS at university, then go PHP.
Java and J2EE is another kettle of fish... someone else can chime in on webobjects, j2ee, vs. .Net and PHP
Originally posted by Hugi
Hey, a fellow Lasso user!
J2EE, ASP and PHP look really dated when compared to WO. They're probably more suitable for very simple stuff, but for projects above a certain size, WO is the way to go.
So, yeah, try WO - it rules.
i'm no coder though, script hacker more like it
Originally posted by ast3r3x
...I use PHP
So WO is that good huh?
Need I say more?
Originally posted by bborofka
How does WebObjects compare to .Net? Everyone in my CS dept. at my University speak of .Net like it's some cutting-edge buzzword. They either love it or hate it, and most seem to love it... ("because it makes things so easy"). I've never developed with .Net, but I've always wondered what open-source or Apple-developed technologies out there compete (or at least complement) it.
Could Apple turn WebObjects into the open-source, more elegant, more innovative .Net alternative?
WO is already more elegant, more innovative than .NET
One of WOs strongest features is EOF, the Enterprise Object Framework (CoreData's grandpa). It's a persistency framework that allows you to map data sources (usually databases) to Object graphs in your application. EOF abstracts you from having to talk directly to the data source, while in .NET, you'll typically be writing SQL-code to fetch data from a database.
Here's a little secret: I've been working with WO on top of SQL databases for about 6-7 years now (MSSQL Server, Oracle, MySQL, FrontBase) and I've never written a single line of SQL-code in any of my apps. I have absolutely no knowledge of SQL, I just write java code using the EOF.
Man, I'm really starting to sound like a fanboy
Originally posted by Hugi
Wrong.
* WO supported java alongside ObjC back in the NeXT days, and did so up to WO 5.
* Apple lowered the price of WO to $699 in the year 2000.
* WO 5 was shipped in 2001 and was the first release to drop support for ObjC.
Now, ObjC is nice. ObjC is a far better language than java and I used to do all of my programming in ObjC before WO 5. But Java has a lot of momentum behind it, you can hire java programmers of the street (almost literally, these days) and the amount of java class libraries available is stunning. If you're doing web work, java is the way to go, unfortunately, so I think Apple made the right decision to make java their primary focus. For example, I doubt WO sould be offering the really cool web services features WO 5 has if they had stuck with ObjC.
Not to mention, I am deploying my apps across several platforms, problem free. Java is nice that way.
I doubt it. In fact, I believe an open source movement would be more likely to favor java, the simple reason being the sheer size of the java population.
If Apple were to make WO a proprietary vertical solution again, ObjC might be the way to go, but Java is just right, right now.
Wrong.
WebObjects Java Bridge support came after the merger. I know I worked at both places. I had to support WOF in Enterprise Technical Support.
Cocoa WOF stomped the shit out of Java WOF. With Xcode 2.1 and WOF 5.3 I'm just now getting back to reviewing it after the wasted efforts Steve chose to make towards us in the Enterprise Group (The rest of NeXT not in Engineering) and ultimately resulted in many talented people quitting Apple.
I agree the Open Source structure, in the short-term, would favor java but once GCC 4.1 gets the Apple changes it is very easy for the Cocoa WOF to be open-sourced and allow both Darwin and Linux to be deployment as well as Development platforms.
If they do opensource it they need to add some EOFAdaptors codebase for folks to ramp up on.
postgresqlAdaptor, mysqlAdaptor both come to mind.
WebServices is a specification that can be written in any language.
The inherent advantages of ObjC over Java are still prevalent, today and with the advent of Cocoa Bindings, the gap widens.
Apple should first see what the public response is for WOF 5.3 and yes the WOF team has plenty of Cocoa experts on hand as well.
Both Bill Bumgarner and Scott Anguish work at Apple. Hell for all I know they were able to get some of the old French Team back who wrote WOF as a month long project back at NeXT.
If Apple gets serious with EOF that means they are once again serious about the Enterprise.
Time will tell.
Originally posted by mdriftmeyer
Wrong.
WebObjects Java Bridge support came after the merger. I know I worked at both places. I had to support WOF in Enterprise Technical Support.
Cocoa WOF stomped the shit out of Java WOF. With Xcode 2.1 and WOF 5.3 I'm just now getting back to reviewing it after the wasted efforts Steve chose to make towards us in the Enterprise Group (The rest of NeXT not in Engineering) and ultimately resulted in many talented people quitting Apple.
I agree the Open Source structure, in the short-term, would favor java but once GCC 4.1 gets the Apple changes it is very easy for the Cocoa WOF to be open-sourced and allow both Darwin and Linux to be deployment as well as Development platforms.
If they do opensource it they need to add some EOFAdaptors codebase for folks to ramp up on.
postgresqlAdaptor, mysqlAdaptor both come to mind.
WebServices is a specification that can be written in any language.
The inherent advantages of ObjC over Java are still prevalent, today and with the advent of Cocoa Bindings, the gap widens.
Apple should first see what the public response is for WOF 5.3 and yes the WOF team has plenty of Cocoa experts on hand as well.
Both Bill Bumgarner and Scott Anguish work at Apple. Hell for all I know they were able to get some of the old French Team back who wrote WOF as a month long project back at NeXT.
If Apple gets serious with EOF that means they are once again serious about the Enterprise.
Time will tell.
Ah yes, the bridge *shudder* certainly came from Apple but WOF 3.0 started java support and that was released by NeXT, right? IMHO, NeXT implemented java "the right way", keeping the java and ObjC implementations separate.
What I meant when I was talking about java helping with the implementation of WebServices is that WO uses Apache's pre-existing Axis library to provide webservices. Just one example of how pre-existing java libraries can help shorten the path to embracing or implementing new technology.
But I do agree that ObjC is a far superior language. I would looove for Apple to reintroduce it to the WO mix, and I'd use it if they did (heck, I'd even like WebScript back, that allowed for some seriously efficient programming). But don't drop support for java, and definitely don't reintroduce the bridge. The fact that back in the WO 4.5 days, many people were using java despite the buggy bridge, is proof that java support is essential.
I didn't know Scott was at Apple now! Perhaps there's hope for ObjC-support with him and bbum on board! I hope so.
"The French team"? Hmmm, was "petite abeille" (can't remember his real name) from the WO lists perhaps rehired by Apple to work on WOF?
Originally posted by Hugi
"The French team"? Hmmm, was "petite abeille" (can't remember his real name) from the WO lists perhaps rehired by Apple to work on WOF? [/B]
I can confirm "Petite Abeille" is not at Apple at the moment (the names have been changed to protect the Innocent)...unless he was hired in the last 1-2 months.
As for Obj C, this would be one u-turn too much for WO imho.
There are good open-source alternatives (SOPE etc) if people want to go down that route.
It's bizarre, it seems like anything with Apple attached to it is given the cold shoulder. I've mentioned Rendevous/Bonjour a couple times and get the dreaded eye-roll and shrug.
Oh well, maybe I'll grab a copy of XCode 2.1, develop some apps in WO and show them to management.
- Jasen.
Originally posted by jasenj1
Oh well, maybe I'll grab a copy of XCode 2.1, develop some apps in WO and show them to management.
- Jasen. [/B]
The first weeks/months are hard to get to know the frameworks, some books help, see
http://wocode.com/cgi-bin/WebObjects/WOCode
on the right side.
But once you are up to speed with WebObjects, management will think you either have supernatural programming powers or work 18 hours a day
Originally posted by jabba
But once you are up to speed with WebObjects, management will think you either have supernatural programming powers or work 18 hours a day
Sssssh, not so loud, you'll let everyone in on our secret
But yeah, check out WO, WOCode is a good place to start.
Apple's WO mailing list is also filled with helpful people and newbie questions usually get answered quickly (the archives are an indispensable source of knowledge as well).
http://lists.apple.com/mailman/listinfo/webobjects-dev