cocoon-users mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Marc Driftmeyer <>
Subject Re: Cocoon 2.1.x v WebObjects 5.x
Date Mon, 10 Jul 2006 06:37:40 GMT
To clarify seeing as I used to support WOF at NeXT and Apple.
WebObjects lost its elegance when it switched from Objective-C to Java.
How so? The fact it used to be based on Openstep and later if it had
been maintained with Apple only platform, Cocoa, then it could leverage
all the elegant frameworks in Tiger.

With Leopard I'd expect some major changes with WebObjects. I know
several people who are involved and they are more than skilled to bring
it up to speed, where it once lead the industry.

I'd like to see it provide some frameworks that could work jointly with
Cocoon 2.2 and Maven.

- Marc

--- Carsten Ziegeler <> wrote:

> Gavin Carothers schrieb:
> > Yes, oddly enough I have used both.
> > 
> > ... now... compare them...
> > 
> > WebObjects: hasn't been updated in 4 years or so, and has anemic
> XML  
> > support, but has excellent tools for doing MVC style applications. 
> > There is honestly nothing like Direct To Web and the rules
> framework  
> > in any modern web application framework java or otherwise. Rails  
> > pretends to be able to do what DTW does, Zope likely can do most of
> > what Direct To Web can but the learning curve there is... cliff
> like.  
> > Also, EO while nice and reasonably easy to get started with isn't  
> > nearly as flexible as hibernate or OJB. WebObjects, even in 5.X,  
> > still shows a great deal of it's Objective-C roots. NSXML!? Come
> on,  
> > this is 2006.
> > 
> > Cocoon: has been updated, is open source. Lives breaths and churns 
> > XML. However no direct integration with any model framework.  
> > Flowscript or Javaflow is a dramatic departure from the widget and 
> > page based model that webobjects and most older web frameworks use.
> > As mentioned before, there isn't anything like Direct To Web. The  
> > template block acts something like .wo's do, but since all of the  
> > flow, URI space and bizlogic is _really_ separated in cocoon there 
> > isn't a good way to compare how they both work.
> > 
> > In short Cocoon is modern, and doesn't have much in the way of
> tools  
> > and WebObjects is honestly ancient but has some awesome tools (So  
> > long as your running Mac OS X and don't mind XCode for Java...
> unless  
> > wo-lips has gotten a great deal better).
> > 
> > If you want more, feel free to follow up off list as I'm not sure
> how  
> > much use this is to the rest of the community.
> > 
> I worked several years with WebObjects before I was "forced" to use
> Cocoon (by switching my employee) :)
> I think the comparison above summarizes it very good. I personally
> still
> think that WO is one of the best web frameworks, but if it isn't
> really
> maintained I would rather not use it. The tools are great,
> Objective-C
> is imho a far better language than Java and EOF and DTW are
> fantastic.
> But the learning curve imho is even higher than learning Cocoon as
> there
> are so many classes and libs.
> The way of modelling the flow through your application is imho nicer
> as
> in Cocoon with FlowScript.
> Carsten
> -- 
> Carsten Ziegeler - Open Source Group, S&N AG
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail:
> For additional commands, e-mail:

Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 

To unsubscribe, e-mail:
For additional commands, e-mail:

View raw message