Comments on: Boycott JSF http://www.bileblog.org/2004/09/boycott-jsf/ If you have nothing bad to say, say nothing. Tue, 9 Mar 2010 23:39:25 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.7 hourly 1 By: Arash Rajaeeyan http://www.bileblog.org/2004/09/boycott-jsf/comment-page-1/#comment-2664 Arash Rajaeeyan Thu, 17 Aug 2006 14:14:06 +0000 http://www.bileblog.org/?p=109#comment-2664 >>>I have yet to see a single positive review of this spec that comes from a non-Struts user. ok now we have JSF 1.2, alignment with JSP, facelets, and web beans (JSR 299) do you think this review is enough, or you think it needs more review? >>>I have yet to see a single positive review of this spec that comes from a non-Struts user.

ok now we have JSF 1.2, alignment with JSP, facelets, and web beans (JSR 299)

do you think this review is enough, or you think it needs more review?

]]> By: Tucsonalama http://www.bileblog.org/2004/09/boycott-jsf/comment-page-1/#comment-2663 Tucsonalama Thu, 05 May 2005 20:21:23 +0000 http://www.bileblog.org/?p=109#comment-2663 First I love the blog... But having spent the past year trying to wrangle struts into handling context sensitive menu options on the same page and then having to explain how to do it over and over again to other struts developers... frankly, JSF looks very attractive! Ahhh.. event driven. Like a tall glass of water. First I love the blog…

But having spent the past year trying to wrangle struts into handling context sensitive menu options on the same page and then having to explain how to do it over and over again to other struts developers… frankly, JSF looks very attractive! Ahhh.. event driven. Like a tall glass of water.

]]> By: Michael Jouravlev http://www.bileblog.org/2004/09/boycott-jsf/comment-page-1/#comment-2662 Michael Jouravlev Fri, 11 Mar 2005 17:26:50 +0000 http://www.bileblog.org/?p=109#comment-2662 How one can compare Tapestry and Struts? Struts is a controller framework (taglibs aside), Tapestry is a view framework. How one can compare Tapestry and Struts? Struts is a controller framework (taglibs aside), Tapestry is a view framework.

]]> By: qwerty http://www.bileblog.org/2004/09/boycott-jsf/comment-page-1/#comment-2661 qwerty Tue, 05 Oct 2004 10:40:04 +0000 http://www.bileblog.org/?p=109#comment-2661 I think Craig Mac Calahan is a good programmer. Tomcat 4 is quite well done. However I have to agree that Struts is not so great (did not change much in 4 years), and that Tapestry has a very good approach to build web apps (unfortunately it is a little bit on the slow side). I guess the problem with struts/jsf is that they absolutely wanted to use the cool jsp custom tags which end up producing something unreadable, not easily maintainable. I have a complaint about Webworks: it seems silly to use velocity behind their custom jsp tags => Webwork + jsp = not good. I think Craig Mac Calahan is a good programmer. Tomcat 4 is quite well done. However I have to agree that Struts is not so great (did not change much in 4 years), and that Tapestry has a very good approach to build web apps (unfortunately it is a little bit on the slow side).
I guess the problem with struts/jsf is that they absolutely wanted to use the cool jsp custom tags which end up producing something unreadable, not easily maintainable.
I have a complaint about Webworks: it seems silly to use velocity behind their custom jsp tags => Webwork + jsp = not good.

]]> By: DrReverend http://www.bileblog.org/2004/09/boycott-jsf/comment-page-1/#comment-2660 DrReverend Sat, 25 Sep 2004 07:48:06 +0000 http://www.bileblog.org/?p=109#comment-2660 I've used Struts before and found it to be ok, not great, just ok. I tried JSF for the first time today. Now I have a new appriciation for Struts. I found JSF to be awkward and unintuitive. I just couldn't see what makes it better than Struts. It doesn't seem to solve any of Struts major problems, (whatever you may consider them to be). If someone can explain it too me I'd really appriciate it. I don't see the point of JSF. Struts exists and has had pretty widespread industry acceptance. Why do we need JSF? I’ve used Struts before and found it to be ok, not great, just ok.

I tried JSF for the first time today.
Now I have a new appriciation for Struts.
I found JSF to be awkward and unintuitive.
I just couldn’t see what makes it better than Struts. It doesn’t seem to solve any of Struts major problems, (whatever you may consider them to be). If someone can explain it too me I’d really appriciate it.

I don’t see the point of JSF. Struts exists and has had pretty widespread industry acceptance.
Why do we need JSF?

]]> By: Rick Hightower http://www.bileblog.org/2004/09/boycott-jsf/comment-page-1/#comment-2659 Rick Hightower Fri, 24 Sep 2004 18:52:27 +0000 http://www.bileblog.org/?p=109#comment-2659 "I won't go into the details of why JSF is c#$%." Be honest... I doubt that you could go into detail. Your hatred for a technology that you have not used is troubling. "once you discount people on the expert group, jsf vendors, and struts users" or apparently by your later post... anyone whatsoever who disagrees with you. I think you have shown your true colors. If you don't agree with Hani, your opinion does not count because of XYZ. "To date, I have yet to see a single positive review of this spec that comes from a non-Struts user. WebWork, Tapestry, Spring, and pretty much every non-Struts framework users scoff and laugh at JSF. It's ugly, it's not intuitive, and it is hellbent on the Microsoft style approach; f555 the users and force them to use clever tools. " Spring has JSF integration. I guess they realize what you don't. JSF will be used by a lot of companies. “I won’t go into the details of why JSF is c#$%.”

Be honest… I doubt that you could go into detail. Your hatred for a technology that you have not used is troubling.

“once you discount people on the expert group, jsf vendors, and struts users” or apparently by your later post… anyone whatsoever who disagrees with you.

I think you have shown your true colors. If you don’t agree with Hani, your opinion does not count because of XYZ.

“To date, I have yet to see a single positive review of this spec that comes from a non-Struts user. WebWork, Tapestry, Spring, and pretty much every non-Struts framework users scoff and laugh at JSF. It’s ugly, it’s not intuitive, and it is hellbent on the Microsoft style approach; f555 the users and force them to use clever tools. ”

Spring has JSF integration. I guess they realize what you don’t. JSF will be used by a lot of companies.

]]> By: thecodemonster http://www.bileblog.org/2004/09/boycott-jsf/comment-page-1/#comment-2658 thecodemonster Fri, 24 Sep 2004 08:41:51 +0000 http://www.bileblog.org/?p=109#comment-2658 I like JSF. As a software developer, and not some mind dumb twit that needs a framework to do web apps. Or even worse, a MIS major who can't figure out that separation of concerns is just polished old fashion problem solving. I like the fact that I can build a complete user interface with JSF and not have to wait on the EJB or avalon component backends to show up from whatever third world nation outsourcing company won the contract. JSF is the best thing to help the JAVA web-based open source applications community catch up with PHP. Cause believe me, the OS crap that Hani is consitently kneels in front of hasn't and can't produce any applications that people can just USE. I like JSF. As a software developer, and not some mind dumb twit that needs a framework to do web apps. Or even worse, a MIS major who can’t figure out that separation of concerns is just polished old fashion problem solving.

I like the fact that I can build a complete user interface with JSF and not have to wait on the EJB or avalon component backends to show up from whatever third world nation outsourcing company won the contract.

JSF is the best thing to help the JAVA web-based open source applications community catch up with PHP. Cause believe me, the OS crap that Hani is consitently kneels in front of hasn’t and can’t produce any applications that people can just USE.

]]> By: fx http://www.bileblog.org/2004/09/boycott-jsf/comment-page-1/#comment-2657 fx Thu, 23 Sep 2004 11:03:42 +0000 http://www.bileblog.org/?p=109#comment-2657 Not sure if "mission-critical JSF" is an oxymoron. "Microsoft Works" is one though. Not sure if “mission-critical JSF” is an oxymoron. “Microsoft Works” is one though.

]]> By: Rob Abbe http://www.bileblog.org/2004/09/boycott-jsf/comment-page-1/#comment-2656 Rob Abbe Thu, 23 Sep 2004 09:33:19 +0000 http://www.bileblog.org/?p=109#comment-2656 At the risk of getting blasted for having a differing opinion, I must say that Overall, I think it's a big plus for Java to have JSF based tools that are on par with ASP.Net. Making Java accessible to more developers is a plus and having a standard supported between vendors is a big win as well. Web development is only a small part of my current job. I hate and I stress hate working with HTML. Any tools that make an effort to hide the ugliness of working with HTML and other web related crap is fine with me. At the risk of getting blasted for having a differing opinion, I must say that Overall, I think it’s a big plus for Java to have JSF based tools that are on par with ASP.Net.

Making Java accessible to more developers is a plus and having a standard supported between vendors is a big win as well.

Web development is only a small part of my current job. I hate and I stress hate working with HTML. Any tools that make an effort to hide the ugliness of working with HTML and other web related crap is fine with me.

]]> By: a faithfull follower of this Blog http://www.bileblog.org/2004/09/boycott-jsf/comment-page-1/#comment-2655 a faithfull follower of this Blog Thu, 23 Sep 2004 03:34:59 +0000 http://www.bileblog.org/?p=109#comment-2655 Hmmm... I'm confused Hani. Does the total lack of the usual amount of unmentionables in such a lengthy entry mean that you're, secretly, admiring JSF but feel obliged to live up to the expectations of this blog, or do you feel you really, really, need to get the message across? - a faithfull follower of this Blog Hmmm… I’m confused Hani. Does the total lack of the usual amount of unmentionables in such a lengthy entry mean that you’re, secretly, admiring JSF but feel obliged to live up to the expectations of this blog, or do you feel you really, really, need to get the message across?

- a faithfull follower of this Blog

]]> By: Anonymous http://www.bileblog.org/2004/09/boycott-jsf/comment-page-1/#comment-2654 Anonymous Wed, 22 Sep 2004 05:21:11 +0000 http://www.bileblog.org/?p=109#comment-2654 "Hardcore enterprise people". Can you have hardcore mediocrity? “Hardcore enterprise people”. Can you have hardcore mediocrity?

]]> By: /9 http://www.bileblog.org/2004/09/boycott-jsf/comment-page-1/#comment-2653 /9 Wed, 22 Sep 2004 02:02:03 +0000 http://www.bileblog.org/?p=109#comment-2653 What do you expect from Craig McClanathanahan? He hasn't produced anything but hack/bug laden fecal sputum since the get go. Commons Chain indeed. What do you expect from Craig McClanathanahan? He hasn’t produced anything but hack/bug laden fecal sputum since the get go. Commons Chain indeed.

]]> By: Rick Hightower http://www.bileblog.org/2004/09/boycott-jsf/comment-page-1/#comment-2652 Rick Hightower Tue, 21 Sep 2004 21:53:18 +0000 http://www.bileblog.org/?p=109#comment-2652 "It's the people who need examples to see that cr@p is cr@p which perpetuate the existence of the mindnumbing web frameworks which have become so 'de facto'." It sounds like you much prefer people who have never used a framework to comment on it. You can't eat real food, only baby food. You intellectual stomach can't stand a different opinion. Are you always so spoon feed? JSF is well designed and productive. You don't need a fancy IDE to work with it. I just use Eclipse with no drag and drop JSF support. BTW I love Eclipse too. I have used other web frameworks. I feel JSF is the most productive web framework that I have used. It is natural and productive. It just makes sense. It is well-designed. Is it flawless? No. Will it get better over time? Yes. Does this mean I am anti-Tapestry? No. JSF is productive..... much more so than Struts or similar Model 2 era MVC frameworks (IMO including WebWork). With JSF you can do true MVC not model 2 watered down MVC that Struts and WebWork provide. It provides true GUI components and a true event model. I am not saying that WebWork or Struts don't make more sense in some situations, but for many projects JSF is better. The only other web framework (in the near future) I might consider is Tapestry. To me the killer stack is still Spring+Hibernate+JSF. “It’s the people who need examples to see that cr@p is cr@p which perpetuate the existence of the mindnumbing web frameworks which have become so ‘de facto’.”

It sounds like you much prefer people who have never used a framework to comment on it. You can’t eat real food, only baby food. You intellectual stomach can’t stand a different opinion. Are you always so spoon feed?

JSF is well designed and productive. You don’t need a fancy IDE to work with it. I just use Eclipse with no drag and drop JSF support. BTW I love Eclipse too.

I have used other web frameworks. I feel JSF is the most productive web framework that I have used. It is natural and productive. It just makes sense. It is well-designed. Is it flawless? No. Will it get better over time? Yes. Does this mean I am anti-Tapestry? No.

JSF is productive….. much more so than Struts or similar Model 2 era MVC frameworks (IMO including WebWork). With JSF you can do true MVC not model 2 watered down MVC that Struts and WebWork provide. It provides true GUI components and a true event model. I am not saying that WebWork or Struts don’t make more sense in some situations, but for many projects JSF is better.

The only other web framework (in the near future) I might consider is Tapestry. To me the killer stack is still Spring+Hibernate+JSF.

]]> By: Rick Hightower http://www.bileblog.org/2004/09/boycott-jsf/comment-page-1/#comment-2651 Rick Hightower Tue, 21 Sep 2004 21:46:54 +0000 http://www.bileblog.org/?p=109#comment-2651 I dig JSF. I have used JSF. I never used any drag and drop tools. I find they get in the way. You can use JSF *without* fancy tools. It is an urban myth that you have to use fancy tools to use JSF. Perhaps Tapestry is better...I keep hearing that it is. JSF works fine. I dig JSF. I have used JSF. I never used any drag and drop tools. I find they get in the way. You can use JSF *without* fancy tools. It is an urban myth that you have to use fancy tools to use JSF. Perhaps Tapestry is better…I keep hearing that it is. JSF works fine.

]]> By: Anonymous http://www.bileblog.org/2004/09/boycott-jsf/comment-page-1/#comment-2650 Anonymous Tue, 21 Sep 2004 13:45:49 +0000 http://www.bileblog.org/?p=109#comment-2650 As one who's put several apps together using Struts, I can recognize a struts spin-off when I see one. JSF is rehashed Struts + a semi-cool event model + a not so cool component packaging scheme. Struts was PAINFUL, but it can be excused because it was written over 4 years ago. JSF looks like the groupthink product of several Struts fans. I'm moving my latest app to a new architecture and needed/wanted a new MVC and was very tired of Struts. Ended up settling on Tapestry over JSF for a myriad of reasons, but the biggest was this: If you need a fancy GUI tool to make your framework simple, you can't really call it simple, can you. As one who’s put several apps together using Struts, I can recognize a struts spin-off when I see one. JSF is rehashed Struts + a semi-cool event model + a not so cool component packaging scheme. Struts was PAINFUL, but it can be excused because it was written over 4 years ago. JSF looks like the groupthink product of several Struts fans. I’m moving my latest app to a new architecture and needed/wanted a new MVC and was very tired of Struts. Ended up settling on Tapestry over JSF for a myriad of reasons, but the biggest was this: If you need a fancy GUI tool to make your framework simple, you can’t really call it simple, can you.

]]> By: Anonymous Coward http://www.bileblog.org/2004/09/boycott-jsf/comment-page-1/#comment-2649 Anonymous Coward Tue, 21 Sep 2004 11:46:25 +0000 http://www.bileblog.org/?p=109#comment-2649 Sun needed to do JSF secretly and without listening to anyone so they could manage to create a JSF IDE (StudioCreator) without it being crap compared to competition. Sun needed to do JSF secretly and without listening to anyone so they could manage to create a JSF IDE (StudioCreator) without it being crap compared to competition.

]]> By: Anonymous Coward http://www.bileblog.org/2004/09/boycott-jsf/comment-page-1/#comment-2648 Anonymous Coward Tue, 21 Sep 2004 11:46:21 +0000 http://www.bileblog.org/?p=109#comment-2648 Sun needed to do JSF secretly and without listening to anyone so they could manage to create a JSF IDE (SunOneStudio) without it being crap compared to competition. Sun needed to do JSF secretly and without listening to anyone so they could manage to create a JSF IDE (SunOneStudio) without it being crap compared to competition.

]]> By: Mark http://www.bileblog.org/2004/09/boycott-jsf/comment-page-1/#comment-2647 Mark Tue, 21 Sep 2004 11:08:33 +0000 http://www.bileblog.org/?p=109#comment-2647 Glad to know that I'm not the only one who things Struts and etc. is NOT the way to build apps. Glad to know that I’m not the only one who things Struts and etc. is NOT the way to build apps.

]]> By: buko http://www.bileblog.org/2004/09/boycott-jsf/comment-page-1/#comment-2646 buko Tue, 21 Sep 2004 09:31:16 +0000 http://www.bileblog.org/?p=109#comment-2646 java server fuzzes is there because of struts. I dunno why people still want to use it. java server fuzzes is there because of struts. I dunno why people still want to use it.

]]> By: jw http://www.bileblog.org/2004/09/boycott-jsf/comment-page-1/#comment-2645 jw Tue, 21 Sep 2004 01:28:22 +0000 http://www.bileblog.org/?p=109#comment-2645 Behrang Saeedzadeh, atleast try one other non-struts web mvc before wanting to suck java serverfeces cock. Don't you think? Behrang Saeedzadeh,

atleast try one other non-struts web mvc before wanting to suck java serverfeces cock. Don’t you think?

]]>