Echo released under MPL; EchoPoint hits 1.0; EchoStudio updated

Discussions

News: Echo released under MPL; EchoPoint hits 1.0; EchoStudio updated

  1. Echo Released Under Mozilla Public License

    Echo is now available under the Mozilla Public License, in addition to the GNU Lesser General Public License and GNU General Public License. Developers may chose to abide by the terms of one of these three licenses. For more information, visit the Echo Web Site.

    New Features in EchoStudio v1.0.4

    - EchoPoint v1.0.0, Sierra v1.0.4, and the Echo File Transfer Library v1.0RC1 are now distributed with EchoStudio. Custom design-time information has been added for each component of each of these libraries, including custom icons and property editors.

    - The New Project Wizard has been updated to allow the user to create applications with EchoPoint, Sierra, and/or the File Transfer Library automatically added to the project. An additional "Add Libraries to Project" wizard is now included to add these libraries to existing projects.

    - The component toolbox is now divided into component groups, each of which is placed in a tab. New icons have been created for EchoPoint, Sierra, and Echo File Transfer components.

    - Deployable Web Archives (WAR files) may now be built from within the framework.

    To learn more about EchoStudio or obtain a 30-day free trial download, visit the EchoStudio Site.

    New Features in EchoPoint v1.0.0 (over v0.9.5)

    - Table-related components and utilities have been improved to allow for the display of data in pages.

    - A new icon collection based on the JavaLobby.org icons project at SourceForge is now included.

    - A new ComponentPeer allows for the creation of components that render HTML based on a JSP page instead of using the Echo HTML DOM renderer.

    - Numerous bug fixes and improvements to components from the previous release.

    For more information on EchoPoint, visit the EchoPoint Home Page.

    About the Echo Web Application Framework

    Echo is a framework for developing object-oriented, event-driven Web applications in Java. Echo removes the developer from having to think in terms of "page-based" applications and enables him/her to develop applications using the conventional object-oriented and event-driven paradigm for user interface development. Knowledge of HTML, HTTP, and JavaScript is not required. Tutorials, white papers, and full API documentation are available.

    Echo is licensed under the open-source Mozilla Public License, enabling the royalty-free development of both open- and closed-source software. Echo is also available under the GNU LGPL and GPL licenses.

    For more information visit the Echo Web Site.

    About EchoStudio

    EchoStudio is an Eclipse 3.0-based rapid application development tool capable of creating web-based applications that work and act like rich clients. Building upon the power of the open-source Echo Framework, EchoStudio offers easy-to-use tools that enable developers to design more compelling user interfaces in less time.

    Features include:

    * A visual form editor enables the creation of complete user interfaces as well as reusable Echo components using a point-and-click interface.
    * A visual style sheet editor creates reusable themes to define the look-and-feel of applications.
    * Wizard-driven development tools automate the creation of projects, forms, and style sheets.
    * Applications can be run and debugged entirely within the EchoStudio environment.
    * Highly integrated support for localizing web applications, including the ability to instantly preview forms with different locales as they are being edited.
    * Support for Echo component libraries such as EchoPoint and Sierra.
    * Includes ready-to-run sample applications.
    * Applications may be packaged as Java Web Archive (WAR files) and deployed to any J2EE Application Server or Servlet Container.
    * Built on the Eclipse 3.0 platform to provide state-of-the-art source editing, refactoring, testing, collaboration and debugging facilities.
    * Includes the Echo Web Application Framework, v1.1.
    * Includes EchoPoint v1.0, the Echo File Transfer Library, and a free trial version of the Sierra component toolkit.

    EchoStudio is available as a 30-day free trial download at http://www.nextapp.com/products/echostudio. The product can be downloaded as either a complete development environment or as an Eclipse 3.0 plug-in. Licensing of EchoStudio is done on a per-developer basis. The underlying Echo engine is free open-source software distributed under the Mozilla Public License and GNU LGPL.

    About EchoPoint

    EchoPoint is a community-developed project to provide a rich collection of web components which seamlessly integrate with the Echo Web Framework. EchoPoint includes dozens of useful widgets including a chart container, a rich text entry component, pulldown menus, a tabbed pane, and a tree to name only a few. EchoPoint is distributed under the GNU LGPL license, and is available for download from http://echopoint.sourceforge.net.

    Threaded Messages (34)

  2. Echo/Echopoint rock[ Go to top ]

    Congrats to the Echo and Echopoint teams. Echo/Echopoint have come a long way.

    If you are tired of page oriented web GUI application development, then give echo/echopiont a spin. You will find it intutitive and enjoyable to use.
  3. Echo/Echopoint rock[ Go to top ]

    +1
  4. just curious[ Go to top ]

    To many people, Echo looks like "cool". What I mean is that you can quickly pick up any IDE tools (or without any) and make a hello world like application. No validations, not configurations, etc.

    But think a little bit deeper, is it really cool enough for web applcations? Except the guys have strong Swing background, how many really think component layouts inside code are better than using CSS? how about client side javascript?

    Comparing with JSF and ASP.net, I would think Echo is realy downgraded several levels, for example, if a JSF or ASP.net page is setup in a session scope, then the application is pretty like what Echo claimed application oriented (instead of page oriented). In that case, no configurations are needed for different scope variables, no navigations, no more authentication issues since of the single page, etc. The application is simplified, but flexibility, scalibility and performance would be comprimised a lot.

    Can anybody tell me what am I wrong, what is the real deal here.

    By the way, given the functionality, isn't EchoStudio overpriced a little bit?
  5. just curious[ Go to top ]

    You can use a version of CSS with it. See EchoPoint. And look at JSPTemplates.

    As for clientside javascript. That seems to be a shortcoming. I think someone is working on it though. Check the forums. But all compared to all the advantages it is a minor disadvantage.
      

    Comparing it to JSF and ASP.Net - JSF is still relatively new and ASP.Net is pretty good. But both are still page based and not condusive to application development. Things Echo does for you that you gotta do for yourself with ASP.Net. BTW I use both.

    As for the price of EchoStudio. It might seem high, but give it a whirl and then see. It is incredible how easy web apps can be. No configuration like everything else. It almost seems seamless.
  6. Not sure but........[ Go to top ]

    this approach (from the code samples I've seen) seems VERY similar to asp.net "smart controls" that post back to themselves (a.k.a events). Am I missing something? A previous post claimed that ASP.net was page-based, and although you *could* program it that way - this "event driven" way of building web apps using components in a more "OO fashion" - seems nothing new as far as ASP.net (not old style/vbscript asp) is concerned.
  7. Not sure but........[ Go to top ]

    Echo is an event based framework just like the new .NET forms and JSF. It has been around in some form or another now for over 3 years and hence outdates .NET and JSF quite considerably.

    These new frameworks do have concepts, such as advanced state management and component level development, that Echo has had for a long time.

    As for advanced client side JS and CSS, it can be done by creating new Component UI rendering peers. While it does take more effort than cranking out a copy of Dreamweaver, the results are more re-usable and better debugged.

    This is in fact what the EchoPoint project is all about, adding advanced components (Trees, Menus, Dialogs, ScrollablePanels, DatePickers, FontChoosers etc..) to the base Echo framework.

    Brad Baker
    Lead Developer on EchoPoint
    http://echopoint.sourceforge.net
  8. Not sure but........[ Go to top ]

    Has there been any application performance benchmarks done? Is it comparable to, say webwork/struts with tag libs? I have tried the demos but found it to be a bit on the slow side, and it does not seem to work properly with mozilla firebird ver 0.9.

    BTW, how does it compare to Tapestry?

    Regardless, congratulations on the release of Echo 1.1.3. May it become better, day by day.
  9. performance testing[ Go to top ]

    Hi Hamdi,

    We have done/are continually doing performance testing with Echo. The tool we are using to do it is a bit crufty at the moment, though it does provide reasonably accurate results. More information on our "load simulation tool" is available here: http://forum.nextapp.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=552 I would caution you that this tool/library is very early in development and is the antithesis of user-friendly.

    Due to Echo's extensive use of JavaScript to update the state of the client and other design issues, performance analysis of an Echo application must be done using a tool that is capable of simulating the entire client browser environment, such that it will run all JavaScript and handle multi-frame applications in the exact same fashion as a browser client. Tools that make specific HTTP requests and validate responses against a template are thus not capable of benchmarking Echo. In the Echo-specific load simulation tool mentioned above we "cheat" by simply scanning the rendered JavaScript and HTML for specific code that will cause certain interactions with the server.

    One more note about the load simulation tool: it is intended only for performance testing, not unit testing. For unit testing info, please take a look at EchoTest: http://forum.nextapp.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=429

    Best regards
    --Tod Liebeck
      NextApp, Inc.
  10. Performance?
    To all gMail owners:

    Go to the Echo site. Choose "Demonstrations" and EchoWebMail. Play with it.
    Compare with gMail.

    What do you think?
  11. Performance? To all gMail owners:Go to the Echo site. Choose "Demonstrations" and EchoWebMail. Play with it. Compare with gMail.What do you think?
    Download the app to your own server and run it. Then maybe you might be.

    Truthfully, I'm not impressed with any web app, at least performance wise.

    GMail functions differently. I'm not sure what the maintainability of GMail is because of all the javascript it downloads and uses. Also, check and see how much memory it uses on the local pc. Don't have it so I am kinda curious.
  12. invitation to gmail[ Go to top ]

    I am curious what you will think of gmail. I have an invitation for you if you want. Just drop me a mail rolf.tollerud at gmail.com.
  13. Not sure but........[ Go to top ]

    Echo is an event based framework just like the new .NET forms and JSF. It has been around in some form or another now for over 3 years and hence outdates .NET and JSF quite considerably.These new frameworks do have concepts, such as advanced state management and component level development, that Echo has had for a long time.As for advanced client side JS and CSS, it can be done by creating new Component UI rendering peers. While it does take more effort than cranking out a copy of Dreamweaver, the results are more re-usable and better debugged.This is in fact what the EchoPoint project is all about, adding advanced components (Trees, Menus, Dialogs, ScrollablePanels, DatePickers, FontChoosers etc..) to the base Echo framework.
    Even though ASP.Net has controls and is event based, it still is page based. You put your events and your controls on pages. You forward to pages. You have to know if someone hit the back button. To pass something to a page, you have to put it in the session and get it out. Sure it is "code behind" and is a definite improvement over plain ole ASP. In Echo you do typical MVC programming (not Struts MVC but real MVC). You work with objects. And to top it off, it can easily be convert to a Swing App.
  14. Not sure but........[ Go to top ]

    FYI - Create a new WebForm in .Net and look at the initial method it creates;

    private void Page_Load(object sender, System.EventArgs e)
    {
       // Put user code to initialize the page here
    }
  15. hold on....[ Go to top ]

    The Page_Load method is a lifecycle method that is invoked when a "page" is loaded for the first time or refreshed. Servlets (and JSPs) have their own lifecycle methods that are analogous to this. If a page is posting back to itself (as is the case with asp.net serverside "smart controls")- this or any other lifecycle method can be effectivly bypassed by checking "Page.IsPostback".

    *note - an asp.net "page" is compiled into a server-side object same as any JSP page (which results in a compiled servlet).

    Do Echo controls not "post back" to the same URL?? ( in which case, do Servlet and /or JSP lifecycle methods analogous to Page_Load not get called??). Other than the fact that most ASP.net applications I've seen do not use MVC/model 2 --- THE BEHAVIOR OF THE "CONTROLS" seems to be very OO and GUI-like ( at least as OO and GUI-like as most winforms apps - which are also usually not as strictly MVC as your average Swing app - but then, that also depends on the programmer).

    outside of discussing MVC - I still don't get the page-based argument. If you want to tout Echo as being better because of the support for using MVC that does not change the fact that the whole idea of providing GUI-like, OO abstractions for server-side controls that are "event" driven -- IS NOT AT ALL different from ASP.net's controls and "eventing" mechanisms, marketing spin aside.

    P.S. - i still think Echo is cool - I just don't see why it's coolness should detract or lead to misinformation about other "cool" technologies.
  16. and...[ Go to top ]

    you do not HAVE to put information in session scope to use ASP.net server controls (nor should you). The framework has a very sophisticated state handling mechanism that stores state in an encoded string on the *client side* (an html hidden input type called __VIEWSTATE ). It should be used carefully (creating a huge databound list that caches information in viewstate is going to result in a huge hidden field on the resulting html page) - but it perfect (and intended) for most uses to get "stateful" behavior from controls - WITHOUT storing state in memory at session scope, on the server.
  17. and...[ Go to top ]

    you do not HAVE to put information in session scope to use ASP.net server controls (nor should you).
    Didn't say one did. Not keep info in session? Hmm. So much for OOP. There is a distinction between Echo and ASP.Net.
     The framework has a very sophisticated state handling mechanism that stores state in an encoded string on the *client side* (an html hidden input type called __VIEWSTATE ). It should be used carefully (creating a huge databound list that caches information in viewstate is going to result in a huge hidden field on the resulting html page) - but it perfect (and intended) for most uses to get "stateful" behavior from controls - WITHOUT storing state in memory at session scope, on the server.
    See. More differences. You are getting good at this. :)
  18. you're doing a John Kerry....[ Go to top ]

    you said:

    "Things Echo does for you that you gotta do for yourself with ASP.Net. BTW I use both."

    I'm still not sure what these "things i gotta do are" but when i asked a couple of questions about Echo (because I really wanted to know)- I only explained ASP.net implementation details to form a technical context for which you (or anyone else) could actually state what these differences are (technically).

    then you said:

    "Sure, deep down Echo is "posting back". But as a developer I don't know and don't care. "

    -sounds like the attitude of the majority of ASP.net developers I know (it just works, they just use it)

    So, which is it? is it technically superior? Easier to use? Much the same but using a different technology on a different platform?


    I only gave a couple of explanations of *my* understandings of the technical underpinnings of ASP.net to get clarification from you (or anyone else) as to what the *real difference* (technical or from a dev standpoint) between doing component based, event-driven programming is in Echo vs ASP.net (since many have talked about it terms of "better" than this or "worse" than that). From your discription of a developers perspective - I gather that it is "not much" (different). I guess I'll have to play around with Echo myself to cut through Marketecture and/or MS bias.
  19. you're doing a John Kerry....[ Go to top ]

    No, I'm not doing John Kerry. You're only focusing on part of what I am trying to say.

    There is no MS bias in what I am saying.

    You're right. Best to see for yourself.
  20. you're doing a John Kerry....[ Go to top ]

    Bush flip flops like a trained seal.

    Mr. Bush and His 10 Ever-Changing Different Positions on Iraq: "A flip and a flop and now just a flop."
    http://www.michaelmoore.com/words/message/index.php?messageDate=2004-09-22
  21. Comparing ASP.NET and Echo[ Go to top ]

    Hi Del,

    Echo and ASP.NET are fundamentally quite different. They are not entirely incomparable to one another, but to be able to make a reasonable comparison between them one first needs a good understanding of how Echo works.

    To gain this knowledge, I'd first recommend taking a look at this developerWorks article about Echo: http://www-106.ibm.com/developerworks/java/library/j-echo1/. Second, I'd suggest looking at the "High-Level Technical Overview", located at http://www.nextapp.com/products/echo/doc/hltov/. The "Client/Server Interaction" section will probably be of greatest interest with regard to this discussion.

    I also should mention one very important point when comparing Echo and ASP.NET: Echo is intended for web application development, whereas ASP.NET is intended for both web application development and web site development. Depending on one's perspective, this point can be argued as being an advantage for either technology.

    Best regards
    --Tod Liebeck
      NextApp, Inc.
  22. Comparing ASP.NET and Echo[ Go to top ]

    thanks (to all) for the tip(s).... I'm really not one to try and start a flame war (at least not over technology) or banter back and forth with trolls. Just seemed some of the answers I was getting (yeah you, Mark) were not all that helpful (if not misleading and slightly insulting).

    and I wouldn't have asked if I really didn't want to know about the Echo framework.

    I'll check out those articles.
  23. Comparing ASP.NET and Echo[ Go to top ]

    thanks (to all) for the tip(s).... I'm really not one to try and start a flame war (at least not over technology) or banter back and forth with trolls. Just seemed some of the answers I was getting (yeah you, Mark) were not all that helpful (if not misleading and slightly insulting). and I wouldn't have asked if I really didn't want to know about the Echo framework.I'll check out those articles.
    Sorry if you felt that way. It was NOT my intention to insult or mislead. I think ASP.Net is pretty good. I think some were reading into what I was saying. Not what I was saying. Sometimes I kid around and mess with people, but NOT this time. I was just, as best I could, trying to explain the differences (NOT WHY ONE WAS Better).
  24. Comparing ASP.NET and Echo[ Go to top ]

    I re-read my posts. I don't see what you are talking about. I think I gave some good info. I did have a joking comment to Rolf, but I did put a :) by it cause anyone who posts a bunch here (and you don't seem to be one of them) knows what he is about. Previous quotes, as I stated before, where basically taken out of context or the reader was not seeing the correct emphasis.
  25. you didn't answered the question...[ Go to top ]

    Tod: "Echo is intended for web application development, whereas ASP.NET is intended for both web application development and web site development."

    I think the question of "is Echo really is significantly better than ASP.NET for web application development" is best answered by another question, "is a C#/.NET version planned"?

    Because if it really is significantly better there would be a lot of money to earn for Echo in that business as we all know how difficult it is to get Java Open Source guys to pay for anything..:)

    Regards
    Rolf Tollerud
  26. you're doing a John Kerry....[ Go to top ]

    I guess, as with everything, its best to try it out and decide for oneself if it is suitable. I tried it out (mainly using IE and Mozilla as web browser) and i just want to say that I am very much satisfied and hope you are as well. :-)

    regards
  27. and...HttpHandler == Servlet[ Go to top ]

    Not only do you have Viewstate but you can also use the Servlet/Template Engine method by utilizing HttpHandlers and Template Engines like NVelocity or Canvas Then you can extend or replace the ordinary ASP.NET process at will. There are many ways to skin a cat in .NET world.

    Regards
    Rolf Tollerud
  28. and...HttpHandler == Servlet[ Go to top ]

    Not only do you have Viewstate but you can also use the Servlet/Template Engine method by utilizing HttpHandlers and Template Engines like NVelocity or Canvas Then you can extend or replace the ordinary ASP.NET process at will. There are many ways to skin a cat in .NET world.RegardsRolf Tollerud
    Right. I don't see any reason Echo couldn't be implemented in .Net. :)
  29. Lucene was (is) under the GNU GPL license[ Go to top ]

    I apologize for being off topic but I heard that the guys behind the .NET version of Lucene have closed shop and is busy taking in a lot of money on a commercial version ($99 for the personal edition to $999 for the corporate edition). I can not understand how that is possible under the GPL. Does porting a product from Java to C# invalidates the license? In that case I know a good business idea!

    Is it time to look for venture capital?

    http://mohammad.abdulfatah.net/mohammad/archives/2004/09/the_mysterious.php

    Regards
    Rolf Tollerud
  30. Lucene was (is) under the GNU GPL license[ Go to top ]

    I apologize for being off topic but I heard that the guys behind the .NET version of Lucene have closed shop and is busy taking in a lot of money on a commercial version ($99 for the personal edition to $999 for the corporate edition). I can not understand how that is possible under the GPL. Does porting a product from Java to C# invalidates the license? In that case I know a good business idea! Is it time to look for venture capital?http://mohammad.abdulfatah.net/mohammad/archives/2004/09/the_mysterious.phpRegardsRolf Tollerud
    Did a quick read of the Apache License. From what I am reading, it can be used the way they are using it. However, they can't use the Lucene name. Not sure if adding .Net to it makes it ok. IANAL.
  31. hold on....[ Go to top ]

    I'm sure the Echo people could answer this better.

    I'm not spreading misinformation. Just trying to draw distinctions. Someone said that Echo is a level down or step back from ASP.Net and JSF. I would say it is at least a step ahead. Sure, deep down Echo is "posting back". But as a developer I don't know and don't care. Usually. :) There is no concept of Posting. I don't need to know if it is the first time a page has displayed. Cause there are no pages.

    Like I said, I use both, so I see some distinction.

    I'm not saying ASP.Net or JSF is bad. Then again, I'm not not saying it. :)
  32. just curious[ Go to top ]

    I am not quite clear what your question is but I can say that echo has advantages and tradeoffs relative to other web gui frameworks. It is ideal for web applications with complex state as it frees the developer from managing application state and navigation. The component/widget API is just that, a component and widget API that is very intuitive to use.

    Echo is not geared toward sites that are heavily content oriented (even though it does have JSP/HTML layout features) and it does require sticky sessions on the appserver (unless you are doing session replication of some form).

    The other advantage that echo has is it is much easier to maintain and manage the code (depends on the code of course). If you have ever tried to maintain or make changes to a page oriented web app you will really appreciate echo.
  33. Echo ROCKS!!![ Go to top ]

    Congratulations to the Echo team. I think Echo is really a great product for designing complex web-application. It really pushes html, javascripts and css to their max. It is the framework that i know of, IMHO, that gets very close to designing rich client application. The Apis are great, makes it easy for Swing, SWT, JFace based developers to get into web-design fast.

    Thanks for such a wonderful product

    regards
  34. Any plans for a C# version?
  35. Any plans for a C# version?
    That would be cool. Unfortunately :) some of us have to at the very least occassionally use .Net.