Hi Steve, > I guess it depends on what processing you need to do. > No, it does not depend on the data. Vaadin has just the wrong architecture. It is still on the level as JSP/JSF. Vaadin could never be real responsive.
> Stuff like adding two numbers together can be easily done in > JavaScript, so pushing that up to the server doesn't make a whole lot > of sense. But doing this is a major architectural change. >From a fat client running on the server to real client-server- architecture with a minimal efficient communication in between. > Doing XML > processing in a GWT client is as ill-advised as performing 3+4 in a > servlet. There is too less information to decide this. When XML manipulation is a presentation affair it belongs to the client, when XML manipulation is a model change it belongs to the server. I am sure that XML handling is not bad on browsers. Doing the architecture right is a major issue to succeed a project on the long run. I am absolute sure that a good client-server implementation will always be faster and more responsive. Just because a slow internet connection will always dominate the latencies. In this case only the number of transfered bytes has to be taken into account. And there are still many people which MUST use ISDN (128Kbit!) When doing only projects for internal use, vaadin may be sufficient but don't try to put it on the internet. Stefan Bachert http://gwtworld.de On 15 Aug., 19:39, Steve Wart <[email protected]> wrote: > I guess it depends on what processing you need to do. > > Stuff like adding two numbers together can be easily done in > JavaScript, so pushing that up to the server doesn't make a whole lot > of sense. But the Calc example is a toy, and I wouldn't necessarily > extrapolate from that. > > I think the key is to use the local processing for maintaining a > responsive user experience and a good looking app. Doing XML > processing in a GWT client is as ill-advised as performing 3+4 in a > servlet. > > How do vaadin's data tables stack up against the stuff in 2.1? The > examples I looked at in M2 were awkward to work with and I was > planning to try some load testing on vaadin later this week. > > Maybe someone could save me a few hours work by pointing me at some > realistic examples.On Sun, Aug 15, 2010 at 10:26 AM, 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 sample > >http://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 Bachert > >http://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]. > > For more options, visit this group > > athttp://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.
