WebObjects 5.1 offers JSP, Servlet, EJB integration


News: WebObjects 5.1 offers JSP, Servlet, EJB integration

  1. Many contributors to this site have expressed admiration for the WebObjects product from Apple Computer. This upgrade offers JSP, Servlet and EJB integration in a pure Java environment. All this for $699 and you get a great Object-Relational mapping framework (EOF) included.

    Is anyone ready to try this product again?

    Details here
  2. If I only use the EOF part of WebObjects, will it be better than Entitiy Bean/JDO/CocoBase/TopLink?
  3. My guess is it's on a par with Toplink for O-R modelling
    but it's only $699. The downside is the modelling tools run best on Mac OS X.
  4. They really do need to provide a free download developer edition. I spent some time with WebObjects 4.01, and it had a lot of interesting points, but support for core Java standards (beyond Java itself) was not one of them, and the price, at the time, wasn't as attractive.

    Now that those things have changed, it's difficult for me to re-evaluate it.

  5. From experience of using Web Objects in the 'old' days (remember openstep?) the developement tools together with the rich application frameworks (particulary EOF) were (and still are) very good. As already commented, the more recent versions of WO have seemly suffered from their lack of enterprise standards support (not pure java), in particular J2EE. For the new version I would be interested to know if they have updated EOModeler to allow the auto-creation of EJBs, together with relationships etc, as this would seriously be a boon. As for EOF how (if at all) will this fit in with this new approach?


  6. one major disadvantage are the WO development tools.
    ProjectBuilder is at the level of about 10 years back,
    and cannot be compared with modern tools like JBuilder,
    IDEA and the like. Unless they fully support 3rd party IDEs
    for WO development, this is a major drawback IMO.

    OTOH, EOF is better than EJB CMP, and should not be forced
    into the J2EE mold.

  7. As far as dev tools, Now you can deploy a WebObjects app in a servlet container as a WAR file and they have taglibs to embed WebObjects components in a JSP page, I think you could use any IDE to develop WebObjects apps.

    EOModeler appears unchanged so far but it is 100% pure Java
    and since the models are integral to a WebObjects app and the app can be deployed in a WAR file then it looks good for using WebObjects with other tools.

  8. Hey,

    Does anyone know of any comparative review of WebObjects 5 vs. other apt servers and IDE's out there?

  9. Can Anybody explain where EOF is used in EJB world.
    Is it now used as underneath framework for CMP and BMP ?

    As for front end and O/R is concerned Webobjects is 4 year ahead of rest (Tapestry can be alternative).

  10. Can Anybody explain where EOF is used in EJB world.
    Is it now used as underneath framework for CMP and BMP ?

    As for front end and O/R is concerned Webobjects is 4 year ahead of rest (Tapestry can be alternative).

  11. Hi Everyone,

    I just thought I would point out that WebObjects 5.1 uses a several powerful open source technologies including OpenEJB, which is an open source EJB 1.1 container system developed by David Blevins and Richard Monson-Haefel (me).

    More details can be found at:


    Richard Monson-Haefel
    Author of Enterprise JavaBeans, 3rd Edition (O'Reilly 2001)
    Co-Author of Java Message Service (O'Reilly 2000)
  12. damn you Richard Monson-Haefel. I haven't even opened my copy of your 2nd edition Oreilly book on EJB's =(

    I've been meaning to read it, but just haven't had the chance. grrrr...

    Anyway, this will give me an excuse to buy the NEW iMac. =p
  13. To add a bit to Richard's post, the URL of the OpenEJB project is http://openejb.sourceforge.net

    On another note, if you walk into your local Apple store, pick up the WebObjects 5.1 box and turn it to the side. Printed clearly on it is "OpenEJB". It's nice to see Apple openly giving thanks to the open source community. A very refreshing thing to see from a vendor.

    Best Regards,
    David Blevins
  14. Great Product[ Go to top ]

     Having used WebObjects for last couple of years, I feel
    its a damm good product from Apple. As I worked on I found Enterprise Objects FrameWork to be more matured than EJB 2.0, WebObjects more matured than JSP,
    and the things already implemented in EOF are just being
    implemented in EJB 2.0. Though its not widely recognized,
    as EJB, it seems Apple has finally come to realize that
    it can't stay aloof from Industry Standards if it wants
    people to use it product. Now that WebObjects is implementing J2EE specification I congratulate them,
    and hope they would provide a better marketing strategy to
    for more people to use their product.