I am not a typical subscriber, as I am not using Tapestry right now. But I have a few thoughts on various subjects which have come up recently.
First, subscriber and user base numbers. I have poured a lot of "spare" time into framework evaluation over the past few months. After doing so, I decided to keep abreast of the few which I found most promising, so I subscribed to their mailing lists (in alphabetical order: Echo/Echopoint, JADE, Japple, Tapestry). In my opinion, each of these have their strengths and weaknesses, and no one framework is the best choice for all projects. So I want to keep an eye on them as they develop and be ready to go with whichever one seems like the best fit for future projects. Anyway, of these, Tapestry's list is much busier than any of the others. And a large share of the discussion on Tapestry's list is coming from folks who are deep into the framework, not just asking typical newbie questions. So I conclude Tapestry has a larger audience of _DEVOTED_ users than these other frameworks, and I think you have to realize that is a big plus. I think quantity and quality of newsletter traffic is much more important than number of subscribers. For a potential user, the existence of a devoted following gives the impression that Tapestry will be around and continue to improve. I'm not convinced this is the case with many of the other frameworks out there. Another topic that has come up recently has been ease-of-use vs. performance. I think ease-of-use has been Tapestry's main goal from the beginning, and I think it remains its real selling point. Sure, tune the performance where appropriate, but Tapestry doesn't have to be the fastest framework to be successful. A few Web sites need serious efficiency (your Googles and Amazons), but the vast majority just need to present a good experience to a modest number of simultaneous users. Heck, hardware is a whole lot cheaper than development man-hours. Nobody is going to adopt Tapestry because it is fast (though admittedly a very few might avoid it if it has the reputation of being dog-slow). What is going to spur adoption of Tapestry is the development-speed argument. From a development-speed standpoint, the framework foundation of Tapestry is unmatched (not to mention the wonderful Inspector). All it really needs now is a set of high-level components to clinch the development-speed question and some improved tutorials to help newbies get productive with it quickly (I know progress is being made on both fronts). If, in the end, it remains slower than some other framework at deployment time, then it loses out on a few projects. But if it is also the most productive for the developer, then it will win out on many more. Pete Cassetta ------------------------------------------------------- This sf.net email is sponsored by:ThinkGeek Welcome to geek heaven. http://thinkgeek.com/sf _______________________________________________ Tapestry-developer mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/tapestry-developer
