Joonas, This thread cannot be taken seriously and has some terrible advise. It's like the blind leading the blind. Stefan and lineman78 in particular. I miss the days that Rienier would lash out when people spread misinformation or gave incorrect advise on this group. Alteast it kept the quality of the responses high but right now this forum is running wild and everyone who has read about GWT dead code elimination thinks they are GWT enterprise architects.
-Frank On Mon, Aug 16, 2010 at 10:23 AM, Joonas <[email protected]> wrote: > Please do not judge by the Calc example - it is just a minimalistic > "Hello World" type example for quickly showing how events are managed > in Vaadin. Of course one should do such a trivial application (with no > server-side needed at all and just a few lines of business logic) in > just JavaScript - there is no need for any frameworks at all. > > For a more sophisticated analysis on communications, please read > > http://philipp-baerfuss-magnolia.blogspot.com/2010/08/why-vaadin-line-of-argument.html > In this article Magnolia team has estimated that real world > application can expect comparable number of ajax roundtrips both in > GWT as in Vaadin. (Most of the data have to go back to server in any > case). > > On Aug 15, 8:26 pm, Stefan Bachert <[email protected]> wrote: > > Hi, > > > > I would avoid vaadin. Agreed that vaadin looks good out of the box, > > vaadin falls back into the poor old fat-client architecture. > > GWT supports a real responsive client-server architecture but vaadin > > uses GWT like a display server. > > > > You can test the difference using the samplehttp://demo.vaadin.com/Calc > > > > Click a number and it tooks 300ms until the calc will display it. > > This latency is a direct consequence of choosing the poor old > > architecture. > > > > Stefan Bacherthttp://gwtworld.de > > > > On 10 Aug., 09:02, Nathan Wells <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > > > I would look into vaadin. We just looked at it recently, and I think > > > it's a good alternative to straight GWT, but we can't switch because > > > it's a pretty significant change. > > > > > On Aug 10, 5:23 am, Shawn Brown <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > I'm looking to get this group's feedback before I present my > findings > > > > > to the team. What do you think? > > > > > > If open source is nice then go for gpl and ExtGWT (GXT). If you > don't > > > > pay the commercial fee, then you have to open source your project I > > > > believe. > > > > > > Shawn > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "Google Web Toolkit" group. > To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > [email protected]<google-web-toolkit%[email protected]> > . > For more options, visit this group at > http://groups.google.com/group/google-web-toolkit?hl=en. > > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Google Web Toolkit" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/google-web-toolkit?hl=en.
