Hi Mike,

Your preaching to the choir :p  I'm not disparaging Wonder in anyway, I'm a 
very happy user.

I'm just saying the following.  Apple may or may not care about WO.  But they 
have to care about the enterprise, it's way too big a market to ignore.  

Getting back to your chronology, in 2002 Apple was marketing WO but they were 
not successful.  But that was pre i*, pre-Leopard, pre-Vista and they didn't 
have the same swagger as they do now.  So, if they are going to be selling 
X-Serves, Macs, iPhones etc... to the enterprise why not also sell/package a 
web application framework?  It's not like they have to develop it.  Plus they 
have a Wonderful (no pun intended) community in place to support new users.  

Either there is something wrong with WO and it's doomed as a product, Apple has 
another reason or they are waiting to get their marketing strategy right.  Of 
course, all of that is just speculation on my part.

I knew I should have kept my mouth shut!

Johnny



On Nov 24, 2009, at 12:48 PM, Mike Schrag wrote:

> Realistically, though, would you? Given all the things Apple could spend 
> their money on, does it really make sense to invest it in WO? I wouldn't ... 
> I love WO, but there's a HIGHLY questionable value proposition for Apple with 
> it. One could argue that having a community to hire from is of some value, 
> but I don't know how often this actually happens vs just hiring good 
> programmers and training them. The investment of a couple of weeks in 
> training is way less than a REAL commitment to maintaining a public external 
> framework (to the level that Apple would like to do this). I would suspect 
> every dollar spent on iPhone has a vast multiple over the equivalent dollar 
> spent on WO.
> 
> Regardless, I'm with Anjo (again). Waiting for Apple to do anything is silly. 
> Either you have problem and you need to solve them or you don't. Personally, 
> I have problems I need to solve, and waiting for Apple is not a way to get 
> work done.  And I come back to the question I asked the last time this thread 
> came up. If you had your magic wishing well, what would you wish for WO to do 
> that it doesn't? Is Apple somehow more magical at programming than the rest 
> of us? I personally don't think so.
> 
> Step back and look at Apple's WO releases since, honestly, maybe WO 5.2 -- in 
> 2002 (that year would be in capital, shouting numbers if those existed "@))@" 
> ).  WO 5.2 added WebServices, J2EE, Java Web Start -- a reasonably 
> substantial release that provided new features the community didn't have 
> before. If you look at the release notes for ... the next 6 years, I'm just 
> not feeling it. The entire 5.2.x series is just bug fixes. From a development 
> standpoint, 5.3 REALLY just added the collections API implementation on NS* 
> collections, which were pretty broken (and Wonder has fixes for, I might 
> add). They didn't touch the tools -- just rebuilt them on the new platforms. 
> There was some experimental work on the Xcode EOModeler, but it wasn't 
> actually usable. The rest of the 5.3.x line is just bug fixes (which we can 
> provide, or did already provide, many of). That brings you to 2007 with 5.4, 
> which added a lot of features, but almost all of the big ones already had 
> been in Wonder for years. Inline bindings? We had that for 2 years before 5.4 
> came out. Ajax? That was adapted from Wonder, and it doesn't provide any 
> implementations, only some core pieces behind the scenes. Ajax framework was 
> in Wonder for at least a year (maybe more?) before 5.4 came out. They have 
> the single file template, which I suspect any of us could add with a couple 
> days worth of work, but it's hasn't been terribly interesting to me. There 
> were a bunch of synchronization changes, but mostly those have just caused 
> endless problems for all of us because of API incompatibilities between 5.3 
> and 5.4, and the current tools still use the 5.3 API's, anyway. 
> Vendor-specific prototypes? Been in Wonder for MANY years. Derby support? 
> That's in Wonder now, though I have yet to see a compelling case to use it 
> over the other options anyway. Support for generics? Yep. In Wonder before 
> them. And we have quite a few fixes to those collections that aren't released 
> in a public WO version yet. I'm not trying to dog on Apple here, but my point 
> is that if you're looking for innovation in WebObjects, Wonder is a far 
> better source than Apple at this point, if for no other reason than WONDER 
> ACTUALLY GETS OUT RELEASES TO YOU.
> 
> So in my (not so humble :) ) opinion, the best thing you can do to cement a 
> strong future for WO is to get behind Project Wonder. It's open, it's 
> actively developed, it has committer base of quite a few people (including 
> Apple), it has a very substantial user base (including, again, Apple). 
> Supporting and using Wonder means your future isn't tied to the whims of 
> Apple's publicly-unknown-and-who-knows-what-they-are-thinking road map. And 
> it's great if you have your own internal frameworks, but using only your own 
> internal frameworks means you're funding every dollar of development of those 
> frameworks yourself. That might be your preference, but it's not mine. I want 
> a virtual Anjo and Chuck and Q and, yes, even Lachlan :) writing code for me 
> when I sleep. I didn't even comment on that autolocking thread before Chuck 
> had a fix for it. That's what it's all about. And, btw, that's a thread on EC 
> autolocking -- a feature Apple hasn't even ventured to provide to you, which 
> fixes a "Top 3" (IMO) problem people have with WO -- just .. Fixed. Gone. 
> Don't think about it (well, unless you're Chuck, but that's Chuck, and he has 
> a fix for you).
> 
> ms
> 
> On Nov 24, 2009, at 5:03 PM, Johnny Miller wrote:
> 
>> Hi Martin, 
>> 
>> I'm not arguing that at all.  I'm just saying I don't understand the logic 
>> they are using.
>> 
>> Apple has tons of cash.  So they can use that cash to buy companies, spend 
>> it on R & D, invest it or horde it/pay taxes.
>> 
>> Apple doesn't make many major acquisitions.  So, if they horde it in the 
>> bank then it depreciates in value because interest rates are so low and 
>> inflation is high.  Or they can give it to Uncle Sam in the form of taxes.
>> 
>> Why not spend a little bit a money on WO?  They are going to lose the money 
>> anyway.
>> 
>> Johnny
>> An AAPL Shareholder
>> 
>> On Nov 24, 2009, at 11:52 AM, Martin Perez Barreiro wrote:
>> 
>>> Apple listens to Apple. Im not sure how much they care about WO developers 
>>> right now, come on! just looking at wwdc talks you can get the feeling wo 
>>> is not an important thin for Apple right now (at least wo developers 
>>> outside Apple labs).
>>> 
>>> My 2 cents.
>>> 
>>> kind regards,
>>> Martin.
>>> 
>>> 
>>> On Tue, Nov 24, 2009 at 7:46 PM, Johnny Miller <[email protected]> 
>>> wrote:
>>> I agree that it's not smart to wait for Apple and I for one can continue 
>>> using WO by relying on the aid of the Wonder community.
>>> 
>>> But HP and IBM are 100 billion dollar + companies.  At some point to grow 
>>> revenue Apple is going to have to go back into the enterprise.
>>> 
>>> I just don't understand why Apple doesn't treat WO as a loss leader until 
>>> they are ready to diversify from consumer related products.  They could 
>>> have a great story in a vibrant community with lots of different kinds of 
>>> apps deployed.
>>> 
>>> Just my 2 cents.
>>> 
>>> Johnny
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> On Nov 24, 2009, at 11:35 AM, Anjo Krank wrote:
>>> 
>>> > Apple is a (what's it now 20? 30?) billion dollar company. They are (and 
>>> > should be) driven by what benefits their shareholders. It *may* be that 
>>> > some push from inside of Apple by some more enthusiastic developers 
>>> > inside of Apple *may* result in some - er, I can hardly say the word 
>>> > without a giggle fit - "speedier" release process.
>>> >
>>> > But frankly, there is ample evidence to the contrary, that no matter how 
>>> > much prodding, begging or bitching will change the actual results in the 
>>> > slightest.
>>> >
>>> > So I'd say that waiting for them to do something is plain stupid. If you 
>>> > rely on that, you're dead in the water. You just may not know it :) And 
>>> > btw, I'm "stuck" with 5.3.whatever and so far had no real problem with it.
>>> >
>>> > Cheers, Anjo
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > Am 24.11.2009 um 22:20 schrieb Gaastra Dennis - WO Lists:
>>> >
>>> >> This is funny; however, from our experience, Apple does actually listen 
>>> >> to us, and showing them an "i don't care" attitude will most likely 
>>> >> result in us being stuck with 5.4.3 & Wonder, and Apple keeping 
>>> >> WebObjects to themselves, and we'll never be synchronized with the 
>>> >> latest and greatest Apple versions again, because we think we can all do 
>>> >> it on our own. Very smart.
>>> >>
>>> >> With Kind Regards,
>>> >>
>>> >> Dennis Gaastra,
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >> On 2009-11-24, at 12:04 PM, Anjo Krank wrote:
>>> >>
>>> >>> Jesus. Apple will do what they want. Nothing you, I or anybody else 
>>> >>> says or does will make much of a difference. Nor should we really care, 
>>> >>> it's not like they did something useful in the last 5 years or so.
>>> >>>
>>> >>> You sound like they were some sort of rain god. "Let's show we are 
>>> >>> loyal, or else HE might smite us like the flies we are!"
>>> >>>
>>> >>> Cheers, Anjo
>>> >>>
>>> >>>
>>> >>>
>>> >>> Am 24.11.2009 um 20:36 schrieb Gaastra Dennis - WO Lists:
>>> >>>
>>> >>>> If we want Apple  to release new WebObjects versions, beyond 5.4.3, to 
>>> >>>> the community, the worst thing we can do is talking about Windows and 
>>> >>>> Linux. We should be very clear about this: if we expect Apple to do 
>>> >>>> anything for us in the regard, we should be loyal to Apple by only 
>>> >>>> developing and deploying on Apple equipment. Otherwise, I am afraid 
>>> >>>> that 5.4.3 will be the last version we will ever see...
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>> With Kind Regards,
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>> Dennis Gaastra,
>>> >>>> Chief Technology Officer,
>>> >>>> WEBAPPZ Systems, Inc.
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>> This message contains confidential information and is intended only 
>>> >>>> for the individual named. If you are not the named addressee you 
>>> >>>> should not disseminate, distribute or copy this e-mail. Please notify 
>>> >>>> the sender immediately by e-mail if you have received this e-mail by 
>>> >>>> mistake and delete this e-mail from your system. E-mail transmission 
>>> >>>> cannot be guaranteed to be secure or error-free as information could 
>>> >>>> be intercepted, corrupted, lost, destroyed, arrive late or incomplete, 
>>> >>>> or contain viruses. The sender therefore does not accept liability for 
>>> >>>> any errors or omissions in the contents of this message, which arise 
>>> >>>> as a result of e-mail transmission. If verification is required please 
>>> >>>> request a hard-copy version. WEBAPPZ Systems, Inc., 726 - 1489 Marine 
>>> >>>> Drive, West Vancouver, BC, CANADA V7T 1B8, www.webappz.com
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>> On 2009-11-24, at 10:19 AM, Kieran Kelleher wrote:
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>>> 1) The customer sometimes is willing to compromise and give you a 
>>> >>>>> Linux box ... deployment on Linux is as easy as Mac more-or-less. So, 
>>> >>>>> if they won't let you use Mac, ask if you can use Linux.... and setup 
>>> >>>>> CentOS or RHEL on it.
>>> >>>>>
>>> >>>>> 2) Project Wonder has source for Adaptors. I see IIS adaptor source 
>>> >>>>> in there. No idea how good it is:
>>> >>>>>
>>> >>>>>   /Wonder/Utilities/Adaptors/IIS/
>>> >>>>>
>>> >>>>> HTH, Kieran
>>> >>>>>
>>> >>>>> On Nov 24, 2009, at 12:36 PM, Ralph Scheuer wrote:
>>> >>>>>
>>> >>>>>> Hello everybody,
>>> >>>>>>
>>> >>>>>> due to the fact that some of our customers use Windows servers, I 
>>> >>>>>> would be interested how others deploy their WO apps on Windows these 
>>> >>>>>> days...
>>> >>>>>>
>>> >>>>>> The wiki only refers to Apache when it comes to WO 5.4 on Windows 
>>> >>>>>> and does not mention IIS...
>>> >>>>>>
>>> >>>>>> However, some customers need specific IIS features like 
>>> >>>>>> Single-Sign-On via ActiveDirectory or do not want another web server 
>>> >>>>>> for political reasons.
>>> >>>>>>
>>> >>>>>> How do you deal with that?
>>> >>>>>>
>>> >>>>>> Is it still possible to use the old 5.2 adaptors (CGI or ISAPI) with 
>>> >>>>>> modern IIS versions and WO 5.4? How about 64-bit-ness?
>>> >>>>>>
>>> >>>>>> Would it be possible to set up WO 5.2 and just replace all the 
>>> >>>>>> frameworks with the 5.4 equivalents so that at least the CGI adaptor 
>>> >>>>>> (WebObjects.exe) from the old version works?
>>> >>>>>>
>>> >>>>>> Has Apple ever released the source of the Windows adaptors so that 
>>> >>>>>> they could be recompiled for 64-bit IIS?
>>> >>>>>>
>>> >>>>>> Thanks for your input.
>>> >>>>>>
>>> >>>>>> Ralph
>>> >>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>> >>>>>> Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.
>>> >>>>>> Webobjects-dev mailing list      ([email protected])
>>> >>>>>> Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription:
>>> >>>>>> http://lists.apple.com/mailman/options/webobjects-dev/kieran_lists%40mac.com
>>> >>>>>>
>>> >>>>>> This email sent to [email protected]
>>> >>>>>
>>> >>>>> _______________________________________________
>>> >>>>> Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.
>>> >>>>> Webobjects-dev mailing list      ([email protected])
>>> >>>>> Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription:
>>> >>>>> http://lists.apple.com/mailman/options/webobjects-dev/webobjects_lists%40webappz.com
>>> >>>>>
>>> >>>>> This email sent to [email protected]
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>> _______________________________________________
>>> >>>> Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.
>>> >>>> Webobjects-dev mailing list      ([email protected])
>>> >>>> Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription:
>>> >>>> http://lists.apple.com/mailman/options/webobjects-dev/anjo%40krank.net
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>> This email sent to [email protected]
>>> >>>
>>> >>
>>> >
>>> > _______________________________________________
>>> > Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.
>>> > Webobjects-dev mailing list      ([email protected])
>>> > Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription:
>>> > http://lists.apple.com/mailman/options/webobjects-dev/jlmiller%40kahalawai.com
>>> >
>>> > This email sent to [email protected]
>>> 
>>> Johnny Miller
>>> Kahalawai Media Corp
>>> http://www.kahalawai.com
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>>  _______________________________________________
>>> Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.
>>> Webobjects-dev mailing list      ([email protected])
>>> Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription:
>>> http://lists.apple.com/mailman/options/webobjects-dev/perezbarreiro%40gmail.com
>>> 
>>> This email sent to [email protected]
>>> 
>> 
>> Johnny Miller
>> Kahalawai Media Corp
>> http://www.kahalawai.com
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.
>> Webobjects-dev mailing list      ([email protected])
>> Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription:
>> http://lists.apple.com/mailman/options/webobjects-dev/mschrag%40mdimension.com
>> 
>> This email sent to [email protected]
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.
> Webobjects-dev mailing list      ([email protected])
> Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription:
> http://lists.apple.com/mailman/options/webobjects-dev/jlmiller%40kahalawai.com
> 
> This email sent to [email protected]

Johnny Miller
Kahalawai Media Corp
http://www.kahalawai.com



 _______________________________________________
Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.
Webobjects-dev mailing list      ([email protected])
Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription:
http://lists.apple.com/mailman/options/webobjects-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com

This email sent to [email protected]

Reply via email to