Javalobby - Comments for "How to Start the JSF Dance"

Absolutely I agree,

richyrich — Wed, 12 Mar 2008 10:38:44 -0400

Absolutely I agree, competition is a good thing. Imagine all the cars on the road had square wheels, great there is loads of competition, but yet none of the cars are particularly suitable for the road... this is IMHO the current status of web frameworks - they are trying to patch something together to make the square wheels rounder.

Maybe I'm being too abstract, oh the irony :-)

- Mark I respect your point

alpha512 — Wed, 12 Mar 2008 10:16:37 -0400

- Mark I respect your point and the author but I think this article is very biased to Flex.

- Richard thats competition, it have to be competition so it comes innovation.

I dont have a problem to learn new technology, if you know one framework is easy to jump to another and now more with the help of IDE's and code generations tools and many more.

So I like there is JSF, Tapestry, JavaFX, Wicket, Spring, so on.That keep the Java platform live and well.

I think Mark hit the nail on

richyrich — Wed, 12 Mar 2008 07:23:43 -0400

I think Mark hit the nail on the head. The real problem is that all these frameworks we scuttle around to learn are trying to make the web "work". It's not really the frameworks that are crap, it's the web. Maybe we should start from scratch, forget http, create a whole new protocol that truly suits our requirements and create one easy to use (because it's doing what the protocol was designed for) framework.

The other problem is that say we have invested 2 years learning JSF, so now we should drop JSF and learn Flex because thats the future... no wait this other guy says JavaFX is the future maybe I should learn that too just in case. What's that? Silverlight is the future? Ok, I will quickly learn .NET and Silverlight. I don't know about you but some of us have a job to do and cant spend all day every day learning bloody web frameworks.

...Spring, Struts, Facelets, Tapestry, Wicket, blah blah blah, how I wish they would all go away :-)

Nice article but I get the

pt93903 — Wed, 12 Mar 2008 07:02:22 -0400

Nice article but I get the feeling that you are a reluctant JSF evangelist and your heart lies with Flex. "How to start the JSF dance" sounds suspiciously like a subliminal reference to all that dancing around the different JSF implementations and Ajax and all you have done : )

Anyone using JSF + Portlet (JSR-168) + Ajax and would you recommend this combination? Someone is demanding this for an upcoming project but I'm not sure. Its confusing because people are now talking about JSF2 and JSR-286 is close to approval.

You have a typo in the link "Lean JSF" it should be "Learn JSF"

There's no reason you can't

mark haniford — Mon, 10 Mar 2008 23:37:46 -0400

There's no reason you can't have the desktop UI experience on the web. Flash, silverlight, and even applets have problen that. He's not talking about desktop apps, but apps in the browser that have the UI like the desktop

I don't understand why people wants to continue to create desktop like apps over the web is a stupid idea,

Because they don't want their apps to look and feel like crap.

we have to adapt to how is the web and try to develop applications that adapt to the new architecture

How about the web adapts to how "we" want applications to look and feel.

try to simplify the UI so the user get comfortable using the apps across the globe but it doesn't have to behave as a desktop app,

Web apps (even all ajaxified up) are still clunky to me.

everything is changing the operating system's are not relevant at this times, the network and the web are the new operating systems.

Larry Ellison and Schwartz said this a decade ago and it never came true.

I'm sorry but the Web never

alpha512 — Mon, 10 Mar 2008 23:20:30 -0400

I'm sorry but the Web never meant to replace the desktop, The architecture of the web will never be as the desktop. If you want distributed system's with a thin client that behave as a desktop app so yes flex with adobe air is a good choice or you can even try JavaFX will integrate better with Java technology than Adobe one. And if you really are obsessed that the future will be desktop like apps why not we resurrect Java Swing, Delphi or Visual Basic to develop real desktop applications.

I don't understand why people wants to continue to create desktop like apps over the web is a stupid idea, we have to adapt to how is the web and try to develop applications that adapt to the new architecture and try to simplify the UI so the user get comfortable using the apps across the globe but it doesn't have to behave as a desktop app, everything is changing the operating system's are not relevant at this times, the network and the web are the new operating systems.

Thanks Mark, you're right!

rainwebs — Mon, 10 Mar 2008 16:24:10 -0400

Thanks Mark, you're right! It feels like being in the stone ages for years.

Pretty interesting that I have "to fight for better user experience" in the Web arena when my experience tells me that a decade ago I had better tools and was able to produce better user interfaces.

Even if I consider the shift in programming, the network in the center architecture, etc. I can't accept that I have to wait more than 10 years to get something similar for the Web. But, even AJAX doesn't deliver it yet.

He probably just understands

mark haniford — Mon, 10 Mar 2008 09:40:21 -0400

He probably just understands the limitations of HTML, CSS, and Javascript, and that you'll never get the desktop technology with those technologies.

I think you are obsessed

richyrich — Mon, 10 Mar 2008 04:41:33 -0400

I think you are obsessed with Flex. "Not the 6 minute workout! 7 Minutes!".... "Not JSF, Flex!"

Thanks for your hint. I

rainwebs — Mon, 10 Mar 2008 03:19:04 -0400

Thanks for your hint. I didn't have a look at Tapestry, but I assume it's part of the markup-based presentation world. I prefer Flex, because of its presentation mimic. It delivers desktop-like presentation. In future we will need this, because the users demand for a desktop-like mimic will increase. Even the necessary extra training and some integration aspects, like using Spring with it in the backend, that may be in development at the moment, are worth to invest. For all who still use Struts, I think the change to JSF is an unnecessary intermediate step towards real desktop-like presentation, that does Flex best (of all offers we're talking about at the moment).

And it seems to me that we will get an even more intuitive development with Flex. Adobe does a good job in supporting their "Flash designer customers" in software development aspects. For us, this idea can ease the client development in any case.

Instead of Flex learning new

alpha512 — Sun, 09 Mar 2008 23:06:36 -0400

Instead of Flex learning new framework, another platform and how to integrate with Java it takes time, better wait for JSF 2.0 or if you want results now Tapestry 5 deliver all the goodies, very easy to create ajax based components and you don't need to write a single line of xml or you don't need a GUI designer, It is a very simple, clean framework, JSF 1.2 it is crap compared to Tapestry 5, T5 rocks.