JetBrains Fabrique tool goes into Early Access mode

Discussions

News: JetBrains Fabrique tool goes into Early Access mode

  1. JetBrains has launched an Early Access Program for Fabrique, a RAD framework for building custom Web and enterprise applications. Fabrique consists of a server-side framework, and Visual Fabrique, the IDE front-end.

    Excerpt
    JetBrains is focusing on making it easier to develop Java applications with its Fabrique plan. “For a lot of people, they don’t need the whole power of J2EE to create simple applications, and J2EE itself is so large and complex that a lot of people have problems,” said Eugene Belyaev, president and CTO of JetBrains.

    Key components of Visual Fabrique include an integrated Business Object Modeler to build an application’s data structure and define business logic. An integrated Page Designer builds and binds the browser-based user interface to associated business data, handling underlying HTML and JavaScript.

    The Fabrique development framework will feature libraries and reusable application pieces. The framework will be offered for free while Visual Fabrique will be a for-sale offering. Libraries in Fabrique include standard Web services for functions such as security and user management, discussion forums, validation, and mail. Additionally, the framework can be extended through “Active Libraries,” which allow for reuse of common functions. The libraries can be extended to domain-oriented frameworks, customized IDE screens, inspection tools and property editors, user interface controls, and more.
    Read more at JetBrains storms into easy-to-use Java tools fray

    Visit the Fabrique home page

    Threaded Messages (15)

  2. Nice, nice[ Go to top ]

    At last a decent shot at a web development environment for the J2EE platform. I like the look and feel - quite MacIsh. This will inject some competition in the marketplace (WebLogic WorkShop and its NetUI framework being the only serious contender) and give a healthy and very much needed push to server side J2EE development.
  3. Nice, nice[ Go to top ]

    I was exposed to IntelliJ on my last project and thought it was a nice tool. After considering the price, about $500, I think it's a GREAT tool. I think too many shops get suckered into IDEs that are far too expensive - IBM's WSAD for instance.
  4. .. you're talking about
  5. That would be JetBrains that I'm talking about. Sorry to confuse you Christian.
  6. With all my respect to IntelliJ team (IDEA is my everyday IDE) I feel that with v4 team looses touch with “hardcore” developers and drifts under pressure from marketing department toward “not-so-smart” developers. V4 feels bloated and UI editor is not good at all. With such goals in Fabrique as
    The libraries can be extended to domain-oriented frameworks, customized IDE screens, inspection tools and property editors, user interface controls, and more.
    I am afraid that my favorite IDE will start deteriorating rapidly ( resource drain ) and Fabrique is doomed as yet another tool that tries to add wings to a cart (handling underlying HTML and JavaScript).
  7. Fabrique is doomed as yet another tool
    > that tries to add wings to a cart (handling
    > underlying HTML and JavaScript).

    I tried Fabrique last week. It was very confusing experience. The approach that Fabrique has taken to Web development felt very complex and bloated. I wrote my first "page" with it mainly by clicking mouse buttons. It started it's internal orion server and compiled about 600 java source files to simply show me one label and one text box. And that process took a few minutes. I think that Fabrique tries to take too broad view on web development and it's far from easy to use. Interface also looks very different (and not very professional) compared to any other tools I have used.
  8. I tried Fabrique last week. It was very confusing experience. The approach that Fabrique has taken to Web development felt very complex and bloated. I wrote my first "page" with it mainly by clicking mouse buttons. It started it's internal orion server and compiled about 600 java source files to simply show me one label and one text box.
    One must probably look separately at the UI tool (VFabrique) and the underlying framework separately. Generally, I would be surprised if the number of files to be compiled will be that larger in an eventual release candidate. Anyway, I think, apart from the rather awkward "HTML editor" I think it is precisely the right approach to web development: Client and Server side events. I have not quite understood, how there "services" and "business object model" tie into this.
     And that process took a few minutes. I think that Fabrique tries to take too broad view on web development and it's far from easy to use. Interface also looks very different (and not very professional) compared to any other tools I have used.
    I think the interface looks quite interesting. I am missing the online help, though.
  9. Although a little off topic from the subject of Fabrique, as a long time idea user I would have to agree with Konstantin's sentiments. V4's supposed reason for being was the new GUI builder which, frankly, kind of blows. It's not even as good as their competitors' offerings. The only reason we even upgraded from version 3 was the new CVS integration. If we didnt happen to be CVS users, there would have been absolutely no compelling reason to upgrade to the slower, bloated 4.0 version. In a way I wish that Intellij would brach their efforts into a "core IDE" product and an enhanced "workshop" product that could include things like the GUI builder and Fabrique that might fit on top of the core IDE for those shops that wanted/needed it.
  10. between usability and power and catering to the lowest common denominator. I won't be upgrading to the 4.x version because of the reasons you state. There are many other CVS options (including command line from linux, the existing CVS support in IDEA, and wincvs).

    I love the 3.x versions because of the nice performance, the simplicity, the stability, and the power. I do not desire anything else at the moment that doesn't at least meet these requirements.

    Nonetheless, props to the Jetbrains team for a wonderful product to this point.

    Sincerely,

    John C. Dale
    MS MIS, December 2005
    The Eller College of Management
    Department of MIS
    The University of Arizona
  11. "GUI builder blows" - yep[ Go to top ]

    Unfortunate, but I have to agree. For GUI building we still use NetBeans (but that's all we use it for), but with a home grown generation back end that runs off the xml file it produces. I was hoping for something similar to NetBeans from IDEA. At least a standards based solution with an accessible intermediate file (xml) that stored the layout info. The ultimate would be a plugable generation framework that worked from the layout file, but you can't get everything. Instead we have a vendor specific solution that implements its own layout managers and directly modifies class files. Blows or sucks, take your pick, but certainly not the sort of product I was expecting based on the excellent editor. Far too much like the work of someone who'd always wanted to write a GUI editor, because of all the "cool" ideas they had, but never took the time to look at what other people, especially commercial developers, wanted.

    Perhaps a bit harsh, but its really not very useful.
  12. "GUI builder blows" - yep[ Go to top ]

    Even more offtopic, you can use the 'GUI source' plugin to generate source file which uses a GridBagLayout manager. Guess you can even modify the plugin source to use your custom code generator.

    At least for me, the reason to use IDEA 4 are the plugins: Inspector Gadgets, IPP, Context Viewer and new CVS/Local History
  13. Idea 4...[ Go to top ]

    Well, never mind the GUI editor. But the fact that I can have one project that compiles into different targets at the same time is quite nice. I need it all the time. Also, the webapp support is a lot better.
  14. What is the difference[ Go to top ]

    Why would a tool like Fabrique (proprietary framework) succeed when other similar tools like Oracle's JDeveloper (OC4J etc) and Weblogic Workshop (nice tool) have not really done well.
  15. What is the difference[ Go to top ]

    Why would a tool like Fabrique (proprietary framework) succeed when other similar tools like Oracle's JDeveloper (OC4J etc) and Weblogic Workshop (nice tool) have not really done well.
    Maybe because it is different. Visual Basic has done quite well and ASP.net has as well. The programming model is different from the mentioned tools and it also it targets not only one application server. And it remains an open question, if the other tools have "not done well". I know a lot of people that quite like them...

    Regards, Karl
  16. Couple of suggestions:
    - everybody in the JetBrain company should read "Design of everyday things" and "The Inmates Are Running the Asylum" books;
    - righsize marketing department;