So Josh, let me get this straight if a Tapestry project pays $1 dollar an hour and a JSF project pays $100.00 an hour (or vice versa), you would work on the Tapestry project (or vice versa) because it is a better fit.
Congrats! You are a much better man than me. I am not completely motivated by money but it is a key factor. As I said before, the technology is usually already picked before I start working on a project so in the sentence: > Being a capitalist, I tend to pick the one with the > highest bill rate. :o) The phrase "the one" refers to the project not the technology. Being a low-life contractor/consultant, I tend not to pick the technology. :) I do get to pick who I work with (and in a sense what). If a project was doing Struts, the bill rate would have to be super nice for me to work on it. If JSF or Tapestry, well you get the picture... I really like working with Tapestry and JSF. > Since I am a consulting, I give advice, but will > happily work with Tapestry > or JSF. I've recommended Tapestry for some projects and JSF for others. I am fairly open-minded. I would have no moral issue working on a dotNet project or a RoR project. I prefer Java, but learning new things broadens you horizons and understanding of development in general. -----Original Message----- From: josh zeidner [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, June 21, 2006 10:15 AM To: jug-discussion@tucson-jug.org Subject: RE: [jug-discussion] App Dev Framework choices --- Rick Hightower <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Since I am a consulting, I give advice, but will > happily work with Tapestry > or JSF. > > Being a capitalist, I tend to pick the one with the > highest bill rate. :o) Being an engineer, I tend to pick the one with the best value to my customer. :) It would appear that the app framework world is going through the same gyrations that the mainframe world did in the 80s. During this period we had professional consultants who aimed to increase their hourly wages by developing skills and reputation for 'big game mainframes'. These high wages were kept elevated by an ever increasing operative complexity, which quickly degraded into an excess 'bloat' that, at best was a liability to the customer rather than an advantage. During the late phases economic relationships between the consultants( ala Byte magazine and BITNET ) and the hardware providers( IBM, etc. ) had developed to block all but the most esoteric and complex solutions to computing problems from making it to market. The mainframes were designed for the consultants, not the customers. The end of this phase is referred to as the 'PC revolution'. The above situation resulted in a high barrier to entry for digital business causing a high demand for alternative solutions. This was coupled with the proliferation of new electronics suppliers in Asia( specifically China ) due to changes in military and trade policy. Thus, what was once considered the domain of geeky hobbyists became the stage for a phase of new billionaires, with the likes of Steve Jobs and Bill Gates. To address the question directly, which one is best? There is an assumed aspect to this question... best for whom? 1) the customer, 2) the developer. Certainly value and success involve a comparitive advantage for both parties. If history is to repeat itself, and it always does... the mainframes that did survive were the ones whose life support was the broadest and deepest, not necessarily the ones with the nicest trim, buttons, and knobs, etc. Despite this, the mainframe specialists as a species were doomed to extinction, even the ones who worked on the last of dinosaurs. Strangely, the UNIX crowd is now sitting with the cool kids again with the proliferation of Linux. Most of the new Linux hackers are kids, but you do find the occasional old senior amongst them offering up advice and cranky remarks about the Cold War and 'them damn camyanists'. As far as survival strategies go aim for standards, not bling. -jmz > > I am currently working with Scott Fau.....h and > another ArcMinder in San > Diego. > > We are working with JSF, Spring, Hibernate (and soon > iBatis). > > At night and sometimes at lunch, I work at a project > based in New York which > is JSF based (mostly advice and guidance and helping > people out of sticky > issues). In the early morning I've been working on a > Tapestry/Spring/Hibernate project. I've been writing > Tapestry custom > components and helped them reconfigure the > Spring/Hibernate bits (they had > it configured a bit off). > > BTW, We are looking for people with > JSF/Tapestry/Spring/Hibernate skills. > > I am tired and busy. > > -----Original Message----- > From: Jon Thomas [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Tuesday, June 20, 2006 12:16 PM > To: jug-discussion@tucson-jug.org > Subject: Re: [jug-discussion] App Dev Framework > choices > > you may have just started the next religious war > > On Jun 20, 2006, at 11:30 AM, Thomas Hicks wrote: > > > Hey Rick, > > > > You raise an issue I've been looking at lately: > the pros & cons > > of various web app dev frameworks. I was motivated > by my lack > > of knowledge about what's out there and inspired > by Matt Raible's > > comparison presentation > (http://www.virtuas.com/articles/ > > webframework-sweetspots.html). > > > > In the snippet below you mention JSF/Facelets and > Tapestry. > > When do you choose to use Tapestry over > JSF/Facelets (or vice versa)? > > > > (Anyone else with experience in the frameworks > area, please chime in). > > regards, > > -tom > > > > > > At 11:00 AM 6/20/2006, Rick wrote: > >> ..... > >> Nick, > >> > >> I was up your way working on a Tapestry project > (a few weeks ago). > >> > >> I've been doing some Tapestry work on the side > while doing > >> JSF/Facelets/Spring/Hibernate(iBatis too) for my > regular gig. I > >> also updated > >> our Tapestry course to Tapestry 4.0. > >> > >> TTYL > >> > >> --Rick > > > > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > For additional commands, e-mail: > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
