Discussions

News: JavaServer Faces In Action: The JSF Environment

  1. JavaServer Faces In Action: The JSF Environment (17 messages)

    Excerpted from Manning's 'JSF In Action' Book-In-Review, this chapter looks at the JavaServer Faces' application-related classes, which can be categorized into four general areas: Event Handling (for processing user input), Component Management (for manipulating components on a page), Application (for global resources), and Context (for request-handling).

    Download and review Developing application functionality

    Threaded Messages (17)

  2. Longhorn Jealousy[ Go to top ]

    Anyone jealous of Longhorn ?

    http://msdn.microsoft.com/Longhorn/default.aspx

    The java os Scott could not deliver ?

    How about EJB vs Indiago ?

    http://msdn.microsoft.com/Longhorn/understanding/pillars/Indigo/default.aspx?pull=/library/en-us/dnlong/html/indigofaq1.asp
  3. Indigo? Please[ Go to top ]

    Sorry for responding to this troll, but the Indigo article is pure marketing spin. It equates J2EE with EJB, claiming that since EJB's support distributed object architectures, then J2EE cannot support service-oriented architectures. It says that Indigo is going to support transactions, reliable messaging, and integrated security for web services. Troll - do you think all of the Java vendors are just ignoring these things? There are numerous Java vendors building products to support these (BEA, TME, Collaxa, etc etc). The only difference is that there's a choice as to which vendor you want.
  4. Indigo? Please[ Go to top ]

    Rob:
    > Sorry for responding to this troll, but the Indigo article is pure marketing spin. It equates J2EE with EJB ...

    So does Sun and a lot of other sales people (and some newbie Java developers?)
    Of course in production a large % of people use a DAO (like JDO, Hibrenate, iBatis )

    This is the problem. Managers will insist on .NET (becuase they want to run away from EJB fraud)
    .V
  5. Indigo? Please[ Go to top ]

    Agree Vic... MS is smart in also equating what's going on in Java with whatever specs Sun has standardized... This ignores what's going on in the rest of the Java world. Sun has fewer resources than MS (who doesn't?) and more parties to reach an agreement with before a new spec is approved, but this doesn't mean that innovation waits until Sun publishes a spec, which is what MS would like for everyone to think. JSF is a good example - maybe JSF will be a good spec, but there are a lot of other successful approaches towards rich, reusable UI components. But since they're not based on a Sun spec, it's easy for people to believe when MS says "Java/J2EE doesn't have this".

    Rob
  6. Indigo? Please[ Go to top ]

    Vic: This is the problem. Managers will insist on .NET (becuase they want to run away from EJB fraud)

    I met with a client yesterday. They were talking about a web service that someone had built in .NET. When it came time to deploy, the operations people refused to deploy it, because (as a financial institution that is concerned about security) they are forbidden from using IIS. In other words, managers do insist .. just the opposite of what you said, though.

    As for "EJB fraud", you're pretty clueless. EJBs may be ugly at times, but they're a lot less ugly than what they are replacing, and their use is wide-spread and often successful. I'd say that EJBs enjoy a higher success rate in terms of widespread adoption and percentage of applications getting to production than any other comparable technology that preceded them. That doesn't mean that there isn't huge room for improvement (the spec, the tools, the containers, etc.), just that your bile is obviously biased and based on your own personal failures in using EJBs.

    Peace,

    Cameron Purdy
    Tangosol, Inc.
    Coherence: Clustered JCache for Grid Computing!
  7. Getting things done....[ Go to top ]

    Sorry for responding to this troll, but the Indigo

    > article is pure marketing spin.

    Well, one must grant MS that they are able to deliver. Something I less
    and less see in the "Java Community Process". Just consider this thread
    JSF: A straightforward component model for web pages took more than
    2 years and is still not released - outrageous if you care about Java......
  8. Getting things done....[ Go to top ]

    Well, one must grant MS that they are able to deliver. Something I less

    >and less see in the "Java Community Process". Just consider this thread
    >JSF: A straightforward component model for web pages took more than
    >2 years and is still not released - outrageous if you care about Java......


    You got that right. JSF still aint released where as ASP.Net web forms are 2 year old
  9. JSF vs. .Net vs. ???[ Go to top ]

    A straight-forward component model for web applications has been available for years, it just isn't JSF.
  10. JSF vs. .Net vs. ???[ Go to top ]

    <quote>
    A straight-forward component model for web applications has been available for years, it just isn't JSF.
    <quote>

    Agree. I don't know why they push JSF so hard... There are Barracuda with XMLC, which can handle the event-oriented web components very well or Apache Tapestry... JSP, TagLibs and JSF are not good as Barracuda/XMLC and Tapestry, IMO.

    I think, Sun tries to push JSP, TagLibs and JSF to support the tool vendors because it is almost impossible to use JSP, TagLibs, JSF without a good GUI tools/IDE. While it is very easy to use Barracuda/XMLC, Tapestry just without any GUI tools:
    - Standard HTML without tags, etc.
    - Java classes.
    - That's it!

    Cheers,
    Lofi.
  11. JSF vs. .Net vs. ???[ Go to top ]

    A straight-forward component model for web applications has been available for years, it just isn't JSF.


    Vic:
    +1!

    Also Rob said:
    XX has fewer resources than MS (who doesn't?)

    Vic:
    Open Source has much more resources than MS.
    http://news.netcraft.com/archives/web_server_survey.html
    Pick a winner I say!

    .V
  12. Gee, do you mean Tapestry?[ Go to top ]

    At this point I'm not going to dump all the work I've done trying to build a presentation layer with Tapestry to jump on a Sun spec.

    I'm trying to figure out why anyone still cares about JSF.

    Last time I checked there are at least 21 different frameworks out there for Java. That may be too many, but it's hard to imagine not being able to find what you need in a market that wide.

    I'm using Tapestry for a variety of reasons. ONE of those reasons is because it's available right now.
  13. Mee too I am using tapestry...[ Go to top ]

    I agree with Jason, Tapestry is available now!, soon there will be book "Tapestry in Action" written by the creator of Tapestry and I am looking forword to it.

    Those of you who are still evaluating to find a suitable framework, should take a look at Tapestry.

    Raj
  14. 21 is too many[ Go to top ]

    21 different frameworks is too many. One thing I like about java is its standardization. We have standards for data access (JDO & CMP), standards for EJB, standards for servlet & JSP, etc. It'd be nice to have a standard for the MVC framework. I was hoping that JSF would be just that. But it looks like there is too much competition. With JDO as an example, many different companies put their differences aside and got together to come up with a standard they all could live with. Couldn't we do the same for JSF?

    -michael
  15. 21 is too many[ Go to top ]

    I agree that 21 frameworks is too many. It also makes me wonder why we need something else. I also haven't heard anything about JSF that makes me think it's going to do anything better than the tools I already have.

    I am concerned about some of the current 'standards', because they're not good ones. I use to think anything that came out of Sun was gold, I don't think that anymore.

    JSP's are a horrible standard. Why are we trying to copy MS ASP and why do we have to compile our pages into servlets? I admit, I'm addicted to JSP's just like most of the community, but I'm weaning myself off of them. JSP's are not conducive to MVC. This is a hard admission to make. There are so many better ways to deliver web content, but as usual we have to add additional complexity.

    I agree that things are getting too fractured. I can't even keep up with the myriad of projects out there. Everyone wants to make their own presentation, persistence, and database frameworks. We criticize MS for not allowing choice, but there is a certain seduction about not having to worry about which IDE to use, which appserver to use, which framework to use, etc. Not to mention, just about every appserver is trying to achieve some sort of vendor lock-in of their own anyway.

    In the past 2 years or so, it seems like the Java community has become quite a mess. It has come to the point that I don't even care about Java anymore. It's a tool on my workbench. If it were not for Tapestry, I'd probably be building my current project in ASP. (PHP if it were allowed here)

    You know what I also found out? The company I work for, and most companies are like this, doesn't care what I do, just so long as it works. They don't care about design patterns, open source, standards, etc. They want it to work, they want it to be maintainable, and they want it to have decent performance. We leverage MS and Java technologies and I'm impressed by what I've seen. I don't know how every project works under the hood around here, but they do work.

    I do hope a standard framework eventually arises, but the way standards seem to be adopted lately it hasn't been because it's the best. Lately the Java community seems more like MS. You know, Windows is a standard, and I'm not convinced it's the best.
  16. Tapestry is OK but...[ Go to top ]

    I have developed three commercial Intranet applications in Tapestry and other developers in my company have also developed many Tapestry applications, however, about three weeks ago my organization decided to move away from Tapestry for a variety of reasons (too differcult for newbies, etc.) and just today I began migrating one of those apps from Tapestry to JSF 1.0 (beta). I must admit that if I must create web pages I find JSF an improvement over both Struts and Tapestry simply because of its ease and elegance, and of course I like the event model (very much like the event model used by Flash MX 2004 and Swing). My company has ridden the Open Source wave for the last 2 years at a considerable financial savings, but, we have also gone through many, many framework solutions. Frankly, I am glad to get off the "flavor of the month" framework rollercoaster and return to an (soon-to-be) "Industry standard" framework that isn't Open Source simply because OS guys have jobs like me so the OS product is NOT their first priority (not always they too have to eat) so often there is too much "water under the bridge" between releases (Tapestry 3.x/Spindle 3.x are good examples; hey I am not knocking the developers, its hard moonlighting and working full-time, AND trying to lead a normal life).

    When I think of the significance of JSF I can't help but feel "its good to be out of the rain (of frameworks)"...
  17. Same platforms.[ Go to top ]

    hi Darryl

    I have learnt that you (your team) are currently migrating some of your web applications to JavaServer Faces. Even we are under the same similar platforms, So I request you to please do let me know your contact mail ID , So that I can contact you for any further discussions needed. My mail ID is sameer at spsoftindia dot com. the other related platforms that we worked are - Flash Rempting (flashremoting-java-win-en &FlashRemotingCmpntsInstall) along with WebWorks (Open Symphony), Struts, JSF.

    Regards
    Sameer
  18. Agreed ....[ Go to top ]

    I think that Tapestry is one of the best web frameworks I've come across. I didn't find it difficult to learn, and the whole separation between the HTML and the functionality was great (even though it did mean that a single page needs about three files). I could use Dreamweaver without having loads of funny tags interfering with the WYSIWYG thing.

    I knocked up a pretty decent website with Hibernate on the backend, in a few hours, and was thinking "hell!, why doesn't Sun stop wasting everyone's time and just hire this Ship bloke, or license WebObjects from Apple if that'd be cheaper?!"

    Anyway, a few days later, I was back with Struts, with a still-healthy enthusiasm for Tapesty and a better understanding of Sun's position.

    Mr Lewis Ship has come up with an astounding framework, that represents how things should be done, but I think he was able to do this because he didn't have to compromise the architecture by taking backwards compatibility into account. Sun is not in the same position. For every the voice you hear in forums like this one, that rubbish JSF, Struts, JSP etc, you have hundreds of others elsewhere who would go through the roof if Sun decided to abandon taglibs (yes, I know they're not nice).

    Folk keep asking why Sun copied the ASP model when it was so obviously flawed. I think it's because at the time, that's what Java developers were asking for. Yep, they could have just said:
    "Actually, we're going to do it the WebObjects way"
    but remember that WebObjects has never really gained much traction, even though there are lots of supposedly inferior products that cost a lot more money.

    Let's face it. The average developer's (Java, .NET, Assembler, whatever) main concern is to do the best he can within the given timescales. The majority are not obsessed with design patterns, applying factory methods when a simple 'if' statment will do, and abstracting eveything up to the hilt. They want a framework that they can get to grips with quickly, is well supported by third parties, provides IDE support and allows them to come up with easily maintainable, robust appliations. This is the market that Sun is aiming for, also known as the 'majority of Java developers'.