![]() | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
"The organization last held a Worldwide WebObjects Developer Conference, WOWODC, in 2013" makes it sound like there won't be another one! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.98.255.115 ( talk) 13:40, 17 January 2014 (UTC)
Howabout "Well-known Sites Using WebObjects" as a title here, rather than just Sites Using WebObjects, which might make it a target for link-spam? When ITMS store, google, or yahoo uses something, that tells us how well it scales, but when used for joe's jewellery page, we might want to justify what that tells us about WebObjects... Ojw 16:06, 2 August 2005 (UTC)
What's with the Apple PR-speak scattered throughout the article? "Since then, it has attained a level of maturity unrivalled by its competitors and has powered some of the most innovative Web applications for major corporations such as Disney, Dell Computer and the BBC." ... What? "Unrivaled" by its competitors? "Most innovative"? There are other examples of this sort of strangeness scattered throughout the article, too. Elepsis 12:53, 20 September 2005 (UTC)
Agreed- far too much PR-speak. Should be edited. ianbetteridge 28 Sept 2005.
The infobox says that WebObjects is free (gratis), but you can't obtain it without buying a product from Apple. That it's bundled with other commercial software doesn't make it free any more than Excel is free because it comes with Word when you buy Office, or Windows Media Player is free because it comes with Windows. I've changed it to "Proprietary", which seems to be the Template:Infobox_Software standard for commercial software. — mendel ☎ 20:56, 28 September 2005 (UTC)
Hi, I wrote most of the original article. The issue about whether it's free or not is a difficult one. I would agree that the license should be listed as "proprietary" as the product is not open-source and its use is subject to Apple's End-User License Agreement.
However in other parts of the article I do not see how you can argue that WebObjects is not free?! Certainly the developer tools are free as they're part of Xcode, and Xcode is very much a free download from Apple's Developer Connection website. You are not required to own Mac OS X in order to acquire the software (I agree that deployment is different as you must actually purchase Mac OS X Server or the Xserve to get your hands on the software).
The analogy drawn with Excel (see above) doesn't apply here. Excel isn't free because it's bundled with a paid-for product. WebObjects, however, IS free (for the developer tools at least) because you DO NOT have to pay anything to acquire them.
I antipate some will argue: "Well what use is WebObjects to anyone without Mac hardware or the operating system?" However I don't actually think that's relevant in assessing whether a product is free or not. If you were to acquire a promotional CD or DVD that might be handed out to you, would we really argue that it wasn't actually free because it requires the ownership of a CD or DVD player to be useful?
I'm keen to argue the point further before making changes to article. Grahamstewart 16:40, 29 September 2005 (UTC)
As of WebObjects 5.4, Apple has eliminated the requirement (and deprecated the support methods) for WebObjects license keys. It provides unlimited development and deployment right out of the box. This change has been made in the article. Macserv 20:12, 1 December 2007 (UTC)
Is this the only wikipedia advertisement with an "advantages" section with no corresponding "disadvantages" paragraph? It should at least mention that most of the websites built with WebObjects (Apple store, etc.) are dismally bad. Ojw 23:25, 28 September 2005 (UTC)
I'm trying to figure out why there doesn't seem to be a lot of people actually using WebObjects - it's got to have some disadvantages. A friend mentioned that it's almost impossible to find hosting companies that do WebObjects. Anybody got any information on this, or data on the popularity of WebObjects as a dev environment?
Added NPOV tag, can't believe no one did before — still, correct me if I'm wrong, though. Haydn ( talk) 08:00, 8 December 2007 (UTC)
It is unclear to me that the following statement has much merit:
However, it does allow developers to un-insert objects from contexts (a feature often missed in EOF).
The delete operation in EOF prior to saveChanges seems to provide the desired functionality. Is there a citation for this issue? Kcarlin 22:19, 22 October 2005 (UTC)
Perhaps a nit -- WebObjects was not, as this entry claims, "..the world's first object-oriented Web application server." Credit for that development goes to WebRex which was shipped originally in early 1995 - about a year before WebObjects. I can't find the original press release online, though here is one announcing an update:
The company that developed WebRex is now defunct -- IT Solutions of Chicago, IL.
I'd edit the entry myself but as I was the CEO of the company, I guess that would be a violation of Wikipedia's usage guidelines.... :-)
75.42.129.102 18:29, 29 January 2007 (UTC) Ted Shelton tshelton@afterink.com
So... How does someone get a person writing this entry to respond to a request for a correction??
thanks
Ted Shelton
66.92.180.250 21:03, 12 February 2007 (UTC)
The tools section starts off with a sentence "As of October 2008 most WebObjects architects and engineers are using the " I had to double check that my sleep depravation wasn't making me dellusional, this is still only April 2008 isn't it? October being about 6 months away or so?? Endastorey ( talk) 19:50, 28 April 2008 (UTC) Endastorey
The commentary about iTunes being the "highest profile" WebObjects implementation to date is a bit POV. Dell Computer and BBC News are known around the world too and could be argued as equals in fame, etc., to iTunes. 216.94.11.2 ( talk) 19:31, 22 September 2008 (UTC)
At the beginning the article states: "...or deploy on third-party Java EE application servers such as JBoss, Apache Tomcat...". AFAIK Apache Tomcat is not a J2EE Application server, but a servlet container ( Geronimo "is" an app server...), so I'm not sure if the statement is correct, or if it's been redacted in a confuse way... -- idleloop ( talk) 21:55, 19 September 2009 (UTC)
![]() |
An image used in this article, File:WebObjects53.jpg, has been nominated for speedy deletion for the following reason: Wikipedia files with no non-free use rationale as of 5 June 2012
Don't panic; you should have time to contest the deletion (although please review deletion guidelines before doing so). The best way to contest this form of deletion is by posting on the image talk page.
To take part in any discussion, or to review a more detailed deletion rationale please visit the relevant image page (File:WebObjects53.jpg) This is Bot placed notification, another user has nominated/tagged the image -- CommonsNotificationBot ( talk) 13:48, 5 June 2012 (UTC) |
You can use cookies, session IDs in the URL (generally unsafe), or URL rewriting.
WebObjects is not magic. It works the same as other web technologies, except defaults to session IDs, which are crap. Regardless, that sentence does not make sense and sounds like a stretch, marketing-style.
174.62.135.173 ( talk) 08:59, 1 January 2014 (UTC)
I've just done a general tidy-up. There appeared to be a history section pasted into the middle that was top and tailed by stuff out of chronological order, so I merged them. Also various amends for style (past tense, removing refs to how Apple "currently" does things, etc. Hoo ha. -- gilgongo ( talk) 20:37, 13 May 2016 (UTC)
![]() | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
"The organization last held a Worldwide WebObjects Developer Conference, WOWODC, in 2013" makes it sound like there won't be another one! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.98.255.115 ( talk) 13:40, 17 January 2014 (UTC)
Howabout "Well-known Sites Using WebObjects" as a title here, rather than just Sites Using WebObjects, which might make it a target for link-spam? When ITMS store, google, or yahoo uses something, that tells us how well it scales, but when used for joe's jewellery page, we might want to justify what that tells us about WebObjects... Ojw 16:06, 2 August 2005 (UTC)
What's with the Apple PR-speak scattered throughout the article? "Since then, it has attained a level of maturity unrivalled by its competitors and has powered some of the most innovative Web applications for major corporations such as Disney, Dell Computer and the BBC." ... What? "Unrivaled" by its competitors? "Most innovative"? There are other examples of this sort of strangeness scattered throughout the article, too. Elepsis 12:53, 20 September 2005 (UTC)
Agreed- far too much PR-speak. Should be edited. ianbetteridge 28 Sept 2005.
The infobox says that WebObjects is free (gratis), but you can't obtain it without buying a product from Apple. That it's bundled with other commercial software doesn't make it free any more than Excel is free because it comes with Word when you buy Office, or Windows Media Player is free because it comes with Windows. I've changed it to "Proprietary", which seems to be the Template:Infobox_Software standard for commercial software. — mendel ☎ 20:56, 28 September 2005 (UTC)
Hi, I wrote most of the original article. The issue about whether it's free or not is a difficult one. I would agree that the license should be listed as "proprietary" as the product is not open-source and its use is subject to Apple's End-User License Agreement.
However in other parts of the article I do not see how you can argue that WebObjects is not free?! Certainly the developer tools are free as they're part of Xcode, and Xcode is very much a free download from Apple's Developer Connection website. You are not required to own Mac OS X in order to acquire the software (I agree that deployment is different as you must actually purchase Mac OS X Server or the Xserve to get your hands on the software).
The analogy drawn with Excel (see above) doesn't apply here. Excel isn't free because it's bundled with a paid-for product. WebObjects, however, IS free (for the developer tools at least) because you DO NOT have to pay anything to acquire them.
I antipate some will argue: "Well what use is WebObjects to anyone without Mac hardware or the operating system?" However I don't actually think that's relevant in assessing whether a product is free or not. If you were to acquire a promotional CD or DVD that might be handed out to you, would we really argue that it wasn't actually free because it requires the ownership of a CD or DVD player to be useful?
I'm keen to argue the point further before making changes to article. Grahamstewart 16:40, 29 September 2005 (UTC)
As of WebObjects 5.4, Apple has eliminated the requirement (and deprecated the support methods) for WebObjects license keys. It provides unlimited development and deployment right out of the box. This change has been made in the article. Macserv 20:12, 1 December 2007 (UTC)
Is this the only wikipedia advertisement with an "advantages" section with no corresponding "disadvantages" paragraph? It should at least mention that most of the websites built with WebObjects (Apple store, etc.) are dismally bad. Ojw 23:25, 28 September 2005 (UTC)
I'm trying to figure out why there doesn't seem to be a lot of people actually using WebObjects - it's got to have some disadvantages. A friend mentioned that it's almost impossible to find hosting companies that do WebObjects. Anybody got any information on this, or data on the popularity of WebObjects as a dev environment?
Added NPOV tag, can't believe no one did before — still, correct me if I'm wrong, though. Haydn ( talk) 08:00, 8 December 2007 (UTC)
It is unclear to me that the following statement has much merit:
However, it does allow developers to un-insert objects from contexts (a feature often missed in EOF).
The delete operation in EOF prior to saveChanges seems to provide the desired functionality. Is there a citation for this issue? Kcarlin 22:19, 22 October 2005 (UTC)
Perhaps a nit -- WebObjects was not, as this entry claims, "..the world's first object-oriented Web application server." Credit for that development goes to WebRex which was shipped originally in early 1995 - about a year before WebObjects. I can't find the original press release online, though here is one announcing an update:
The company that developed WebRex is now defunct -- IT Solutions of Chicago, IL.
I'd edit the entry myself but as I was the CEO of the company, I guess that would be a violation of Wikipedia's usage guidelines.... :-)
75.42.129.102 18:29, 29 January 2007 (UTC) Ted Shelton tshelton@afterink.com
So... How does someone get a person writing this entry to respond to a request for a correction??
thanks
Ted Shelton
66.92.180.250 21:03, 12 February 2007 (UTC)
The tools section starts off with a sentence "As of October 2008 most WebObjects architects and engineers are using the " I had to double check that my sleep depravation wasn't making me dellusional, this is still only April 2008 isn't it? October being about 6 months away or so?? Endastorey ( talk) 19:50, 28 April 2008 (UTC) Endastorey
The commentary about iTunes being the "highest profile" WebObjects implementation to date is a bit POV. Dell Computer and BBC News are known around the world too and could be argued as equals in fame, etc., to iTunes. 216.94.11.2 ( talk) 19:31, 22 September 2008 (UTC)
At the beginning the article states: "...or deploy on third-party Java EE application servers such as JBoss, Apache Tomcat...". AFAIK Apache Tomcat is not a J2EE Application server, but a servlet container ( Geronimo "is" an app server...), so I'm not sure if the statement is correct, or if it's been redacted in a confuse way... -- idleloop ( talk) 21:55, 19 September 2009 (UTC)
![]() |
An image used in this article, File:WebObjects53.jpg, has been nominated for speedy deletion for the following reason: Wikipedia files with no non-free use rationale as of 5 June 2012
Don't panic; you should have time to contest the deletion (although please review deletion guidelines before doing so). The best way to contest this form of deletion is by posting on the image talk page.
To take part in any discussion, or to review a more detailed deletion rationale please visit the relevant image page (File:WebObjects53.jpg) This is Bot placed notification, another user has nominated/tagged the image -- CommonsNotificationBot ( talk) 13:48, 5 June 2012 (UTC) |
You can use cookies, session IDs in the URL (generally unsafe), or URL rewriting.
WebObjects is not magic. It works the same as other web technologies, except defaults to session IDs, which are crap. Regardless, that sentence does not make sense and sounds like a stretch, marketing-style.
174.62.135.173 ( talk) 08:59, 1 January 2014 (UTC)
I've just done a general tidy-up. There appeared to be a history section pasted into the middle that was top and tailed by stuff out of chronological order, so I merged them. Also various amends for style (past tense, removing refs to how Apple "currently" does things, etc. Hoo ha. -- gilgongo ( talk) 20:37, 13 May 2016 (UTC)