Well, still unchanged - I guess we should cut the noise and leave them put whatever they want in their "comparison chart".
Francisco 2009/7/9 Vladimir K <[email protected]>: > > Joonas, > > I'm wondering why your comparison table does not contain ZK? > > I find Vaadin demos not very responsive. They react very very slowly. At > that internet responses are less than 100ms and response size mostly less > than 1K and there are only one-two roundtrips for each user action. The same > about every GWT application. > > Wicket ajax responses in our application sometimes exceeds 30k and I don't > notice any lags. > > > Joonas Lehtinen wrote: >> >> Hi all, >> >> If there are any errors in our comparison table, please accept my >> apologies - >> I wrote the original version of the table. I take care that any errors >> will be >> corrected as soon as possible. Just to clarify the situation - I think >> that >> wicket is a nice framework and really want to give it a fair comparison. >> In my opinion, Vaadin is better for some applications and Wicket for some. >> >> > > -- > View this message in context: > http://www.nabble.com/wicket-vs-vaadin-clarifications-tp24353170p24409410.html > Sent from the Wicket - User mailing list archive at Nabble.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]
