I've been thinking about this thread for awhile and have decided to add my two cents.
First, let me say that I'm huge Google and GWT fan. I've been using GWT for over two years on multiple projects and I really do think its great. I just bought myself an Android phone and I'd say its the Windows/MacOs story all over again. Watch out Apple, but I digress. The GWT team basically acknowledges that GWT's widget set needs addition development, and that's putting it mildly. Compared to a state of the art widget set, e.g. GXT, SmartGWT, etc, the GWT widget set is, sorry for being blunt, pretty primitive. For that reason, in the past I have used ExtGwt and GwtExt with decent success, but there were some problems with performance, documentation, support, incompatibility with native widgets, etc. But, wow, these are some really nice widgets and we managed to get our apps out the door. Well, with 2.1 there seemed to be some hope that GWT would start focusing on comprehensive widget development and, so, on a new project we are going to give native GWT widgets a try. We don't have a real complicated UI to build so it should be very doable. Then I saw this thread and thought, hmmmm, Google is saying that they are going to leave it to 3rd parties to take care of the "W" in GWT. Personally, I think this is a mistake. People are going to prefer staying with native widgets since they will continue to be supported and will be well integrated into the rest of GWT. Like I said before, I think GWT as a whole is really great. But I would guess that the one thing that would make it a huge success and start blowing away the competition would be a suitably great native widget set. I understand that Google has put a lot of priority into the doing the difficult things, but now I wonder if its time for them to focus on the one thing that would contribute most to GWT's success and longevity. On Nov 18, 2:14 pm, David Chandler <[email protected]> wrote: > Thanks all for your support of GWT. We're really glad that what you've > seen so far makes you want even more, and let me officially > acknowledge here that the GWT team very much understands that you want > a powerfulwidgetlibrary. That's why we created the powerful new > CellWidgets in 2.1 (in time forChristmas, you may note) and are > dreaming up new widgets for future releases also. > > Having said that, the GWT team at Google generally chooses to focus on > the really hard problems such as compiler optimization and new > features like RequestFactory while leaving the easier problems such > asWidgetcreation (which is easy, in part, because of our focus on the > hard problems) to the open source community. This is not even so much > about the effort required to create new widgets as it is about the > effort required to support them since that's where browser differences > tend to be the greatest. In many cases, Googlers have contributed open > source projects like gwt-dnd for drag and drop support (Fred Sauer) > and GQuery (Ray Cromwell). But we don't think it's too much to ask > everyone to put in a little effort extending and styling widgets in > exchange for totally free, open source software that lets you run > no-compromise AJAX on all modern browsers. > > Please do continue to share yourWidgetcreations via the various GWT > galleries on the Web! > > /dmc > David Chandler > Developer Programs Engineer, Google Web > Toolkithttp://googlewebtoolkit.blogspot.com/ > > > > > > > > On Sat, Nov 13, 2010 at 1:48 AM, zixzigma <[email protected]> wrote: > > GWT with its powerful set of features, make Large Scale Ajax software > > development possible. > > > from Java to JS compiler, all the optimization, code splitting, MVP, > > Guice and Gin, new data binding features, > > and one can go on and on ... > > > However one important aspect seem to be neglected for years and not > > aknowledged by GWT team is > > the absense of a powerfulWidgetlibrary. > > > Thewidgetset provided by GWT is very basic, and does not include > > many many widgets needed to make more complex UI interaction possible. > > > Drag and Drop (Tree for example or Grid, Filter), Calendar, Combo Box, > > Complex grids (sort, filter, etc) to name a few. > > > All the effort that goes into crafting a well architected and tested > > app goes unnoticed unfortunately cause its about First Impression most > > of the time ! > > if you invest hours and hours to get the basic browser history > > working, all the design for testability etc, > > but dont have a pretty looking front-end, its just not fair ! > > > We often see posts here and on other forums from developers requiring > > more advanced widgets to develop their apps. > > > there are alternatives out there, SmartGWT, Ext-GWT. > > They are great, lots of eye candy, but they encourage a more desk-top > > style apps on the web, > > which goes against Google best practices that says not to turn web > > apps into desktop-like apps). > > also third-party libraries dont fit well with MVP, API inconsistency, > > they are also are hard to customize beyond the provided themes. and > > some of the other open-source ones are too experimental. > > > You can argue that well go create your own. but that does not make any > > sense at all. > > if GWT is for Large Scale applications, does it make sense that > > developers spend their time experimenting with where to position close- > > icon on a Tab ?! or adding maximize/minimize to a dialog ? > > what about these ubuquitous Callout Tooltips ? or implement drag and > > drop on a tree which is going to be a maintanance nightmare down the > > road ?! each project creating their own in-housewidgetlibrary ?! and > > test it ? > > > an alternative could be to use GWT along-side JQuery/YUI, because > > there are hundreds if not thousands of variation for each plugin you > > can think out there. but does it make sense to do all the optimization > > in GWT, only to load additional JS Libraries to use plugins on top of > > them? > > > Google acquired Instantiations(GWT Designer) a while ago, which was > > great news, > > although many are waiting for them to add UiBinder feature(still in > > beta), it was a great move by Google. > > > I was thinking if Google Team is busy with the architectural aspect of > > GWT, why not invest in or acquire a company to work on a powerful and > > completeWidgetLibrary to put others to shame. (after all its Google, > > right ?!) > > > I can understand why they have not done this so far, because Google > > have always been about simplicity and investing in more bleeding-edge > > technologies, but they can acquire others to do this for GWT > > community ! > > > The GWT team have done a superb job in creating this powerful Toolkit, > > and been so generous in sharing it with us. for that i am very > > grateful. > > > But a boy can dream ! > > > All I Want forChristmasis a powerfulWidgetLibrary ! > > a mix between Ext (Application-Oriented) and JQuery plugins (Designer > > oriented/eye candy/effects) ! > > > -- > > 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.
