Hi Marius, It's really up to you. It doesn't matter what development tools / frameworks you pick. You can make a good product in JSP... at some point your dedication and attitude determine how far you'll go and the rest doesn't matter.
That being said, remember with Ruby on Rails everything is a "Direct Action". If that is ok with you, then that is ok. Personally I like to decide when to use "Component Actions" and when to use "Direct Actions" because there is a purpose for both. Finding good, interesting, talented people is hard. I think it is *easier* to find them when you are working with esoteric tools. If they balk at the idea of WO, then you don't want them anyway - that's a big time saver! You want people who believe in your vision above all else. The tools shouldn't matter to them and if they do, those people are not for you. For me, on a technical level, it's hard to find something better than WO. I do not like the closed nature of it but that is what it is. In your situation you are throwing out all kinds of technologies and thinking in all directions. Maybe take a month to indulge so you may "play" with them all without any other purpose. Do some simple proof of concept projects. Get a lay of the land. Personally I do this every 6 months to a year to satisfy my own intellectual curiosity and see if there is something better than WO. >From a person who has tried a lot of tools there is one that I'm surprised did not make your short list especially given your geographical area and your WO experience. Do consider Smalltalk with "Seaside." It's relatively big in Europe meaning they have the equivalent of WOWODC for Smalltalk called ESUG. What is cool about Smalltalk / Seaside with respect to WO? 1) It has stateful and stateless ability (Both "component actions" and "direct actions") 2) It has D2W (Magritte) 3) It has distributed version control (Monticello) 4) It has a no-nonsense one-click installer 5) Even better than "in-line" binding it has no template file what-so-ever by design. All your HTML output is coded in the programming language. No more unbalanced DIV tags. Everything is refactorable. 6) You can choose ORM or Object Database... We have objects, why do we need to model them down to relational tables? Now the choice is yours. 7) totally open source. Even better, you can see and make changes on the fly. You don't need to tack on a product like Java Rebel, you get this automatically. To sum it up java is a "dead" language. Those who love it blindly are members of the "cult of the dead". With eclipse java is like the "living dead" because you can quickly see who is calling what, refactor, etc. In other words you generally have to compile and then run Java to make it live. Conversely Smalltalk is a "living" language in every sense of the word. Oh, and Pascal, WO never stopped being cool. We are a good confederacy here. We put the cool in WO. It's not what you have, it's how you use it ;-) Best wishes, -- Aaron > Thanks to both of you, Philippe and Pascal, for some challenging insight, got me thinking a lot. > > Yes there's a lot of stuff for Java, that's really great. That's also why I like Scala and Clojure so > much, but the frameworks aren't ready yet. Do you have any >experience with Lift? Or Play? > > One thing I really like about RoR is Ruby, it's so much better than Java. Is Java really a good > language for a startup? I'm not sure. I also stumbled across Sinatra, what a revelation... > I've read your link, Philippe, but there are also some interesting comments... > > Deployment on the other hand is one of the things with WebObjects which gives me a > constant headache, WOMonitor has a lot of issues (e.g. doesn't restart scheduled apps, > or a lot of time outs) and I never managed to deploy a WO app in a Servlet container. > > Bye, > - Marius
_______________________________________________ Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored. Webobjects-dev mailing list ([email protected]) Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription: http://lists.apple.com/mailman/options/webobjects-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com This email sent to [email protected]
