You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@cocoon.apache.org by Erik Bruchez <eb...@orbeon.com> on 2003/09/18 20:59:55 UTC
Re: OXF rebuttal
Dear Gianugo,
We appreciate your comments about our OXF / Cocoon comparison
matrix. We have posted an update to reflect most of them:
http://www.orbeon.com/oxf/cocoon
A few additional comments below:
1. Professional Support
1. We clearly did not mean that Cocoon does not have free
support. 2. The main idea we wanted to convey is that the
day-to-day developers of OXF are also the people who provide
professional support for OXF. It looks like we were unfair to
Cocoon by not mentioning that professional support is also
available for Cocoon. The matrix has been updated to reflect this
better.
2. XML Validation and XPointer support
In OXF, these are feature of the pipeline language itself. The
validation feature is not about validation at parsing time (which
is clearly supported by XML parsers) but about being able to
validate each input and output of each component in a SAX pipeline
with a Relax NG or W3C Schema. AFAWK this is not possible with
Cocoon. The matrix has been updated to reflect this better.
3. J2EE Datasources
The Cocoon documentation on the subject seems to be lacking. We
have removed this item from the comparison. The lack of
documentation also seems to affect J2EE authentication and JSP
integration.
4. Tomcat / JSP
There used to be a JSP Generator based on Tomcat's Jasper
engine. Based on your comment, it looks like this way of calling
JSP pages is obsolete.
5. EJB
This regards the possibility to call EJBs from a pipeline without
writing any Java code. The matrix has been updated to reflect this
better.
Regards,
-Erik
RE: OXF rebuttal
Posted by Jeff Ramsdale <je...@earthlink.net>.
> Hi Jeff!
>
> I have to agree with you.
> I fact I just posted similar statements before reading your's - just in
> case somebody thinks I'm repeating you ;-)
Well then, rather than being bummed you stole my thunder I'll be honored
that you agreed with me. ;-)
Jeff
> Jeff Ramsdale wrote:
<snip>
Re: OXF rebuttal
Posted by Andreas Hochsteger <e9...@student.tuwien.ac.at>.
Hi Jeff!
I have to agree with you.
I fact I just posted similar statements before reading your's - just in
case somebody thinks I'm repeating you ;-)
Jeff Ramsdale wrote:
> Chiming in on Stefano's comments...
>
> I think Erik and Orbeon deserve credit for accepting this list's corrections
> and updating their page. And don't forget that they have every right to sell
> their product and support services. It might be worth occasionally looking
> at OXF and saying, "Yeah, that's a good feature--we should add that to
> Cocoon." Clearly they've looked at Cocoon in developing their feature
> set--surely it would be pure arrogance to think they are incapable of
> developing their own good ideas. Competition is good for innovation! And
> finally, ultimately Cocoon doesn't really HAVE to compete because there's no
> money on the line for us if someone chooses OXF instead, so no worries...
>
> Cheers,
>
> Jeff
>
>
>
>>-----Original Message-----
>>From: Roger I Martin PhD [mailto:hypernexdev@hypernexinc.com]
>>Sent: Thursday, September 18, 2003 4:16 PM
>>To: dev@cocoon.apache.org
>>Subject: Re: OXF rebuttal
>>
>>
>>Hi Erik,
>>
>>I don't see any "In the works" or "Upcoming" on the Cocoon column of the
>>comparison.
>
>
> <snip>
>
>
>
RE: OXF rebuttal
Posted by Jeff Ramsdale <je...@earthlink.net>.
Chiming in on Stefano's comments...
I think Erik and Orbeon deserve credit for accepting this list's corrections
and updating their page. And don't forget that they have every right to sell
their product and support services. It might be worth occasionally looking
at OXF and saying, "Yeah, that's a good feature--we should add that to
Cocoon." Clearly they've looked at Cocoon in developing their feature
set--surely it would be pure arrogance to think they are incapable of
developing their own good ideas. Competition is good for innovation! And
finally, ultimately Cocoon doesn't really HAVE to compete because there's no
money on the line for us if someone chooses OXF instead, so no worries...
Cheers,
Jeff
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Roger I Martin PhD [mailto:hypernexdev@hypernexinc.com]
> Sent: Thursday, September 18, 2003 4:16 PM
> To: dev@cocoon.apache.org
> Subject: Re: OXF rebuttal
>
>
> Hi Erik,
>
> I don't see any "In the works" or "Upcoming" on the Cocoon column of the
> comparison.
<snip>
Re: OXF rebuttal
Posted by Sylvain Wallez <sy...@anyware-tech.com>.
Stefano Mazzocchi wrote:
> On Friday, Sep 19, 2003, at 01:16 Europe/Rome, Roger I Martin PhD wrote:
>
>> Some things are beyond one company to achieve in one life time.
>
>
> Roger,
>
> while I understand that you might have felt insulted by their
> marketing action, I would suggest you to avoid being confrontational.
>
> This is exactly what they are looking for to show what kind of people
> you get when you deal with those open source. It's like the DoS attack
> on SCO: does more harm to open source than to SCO (and Eric Raymond
> asked to stop it exactly for that).
>
> Like I said before: no matter what they write, if it isn't true, it
> fires back on them. And if they compare to us, it means they fear us
> or customers avoid buying their software because of cocoon.
>
> It does *NOT* matter whether or not that page is fair to us or not. We
> do not need those pages to be fair, we need *tons* of unfair pages of
> commercial products that try to compete with us, because that shows
> our success more than anything else.
>
> Just ignore them and keep the focus.
Yep. And no need to be harsh with people wanting to make their living
with what they do, even more when they listen to our remarks.
Sylvain
--
Sylvain Wallez Anyware Technologies
http://www.apache.org/~sylvain http://www.anyware-tech.com
{ XML, Java, Cocoon, OpenSource }*{ Training, Consulting, Projects }
Orixo, the opensource XML business alliance - http://www.orixo.com
Re: OXF rebuttal
Posted by Andreas Hochsteger <e9...@student.tuwien.ac.at>.
Hi!
Additionally I'd like to say - even if nobody want's to speak it out -
that Erik has shown that he does take the Cocoon community seriously by
being open to correct the comparison matrix (and already has done so:
http://www.orbeon.com/oxf/cocoon).
What companies do with their business is only at their own
responsibility and I think we should be friendly to those doing some
marketing for us (good or bad) rather then be confrontational. As
Stefano said, it doesn't really matter.
We don't need to hide and if a company has a reason to do something
similar like cocoon, they might have a good reason to do so (e.g. lack
of an important feature or completely different architecture). It's
their decision, if they extend Cocoon or write their own solution and
it's their right to compare it just to show why they did something else.
Come on, we all know, that Cocoon isn't the solution for everything and
we should be above such things and should allow others to point out our
weak points (even if misunderstood). That's the only way we can make it
better or correct the statement by providing accurate documentation to
prevent misunderstandings in the future.
Just my € 0.02.
Bye,
Andreas
Niclas Hedhman wrote:
> On Friday 19 September 2003 07:56, Stefano Mazzocchi wrote:
>
>>On Friday, Sep 19, 2003, at 01:16 Europe/Rome, Roger I Martin PhD wrote:
>>
>>>Some things are beyond one company to achieve in one life time.
>>
>>Roger,
>>
>>while I understand that you might have felt insulted by their marketing
>>action, I would suggest you to avoid being confrontational.
>
>
> In principle I agree, don't get into a shit throwing contest.
> But a continously evolving "Feature" or "Evaluation Overview" page is
> something else, and a good thing that is coming out of this, which should not
> be confrontational nor "compared with X" style.
>
> Plain and simple.
>
> Niclas
>
>
RE: OXF rebuttal
Posted by Reinhard Poetz <re...@apache.org>.
From: Bertrand Delacretaz
> Le Vendredi, 19 sep 2003, à 05:36 Europe/Zurich, Niclas
> Hedhman a écrit
> :
> > ...a continously evolving "Feature" or "Evaluation
> Overview" page is
> > something else, and a good thing that is coming out of this, which
> > should not be confrontational nor "compared with X" style....
>
> +1 - thanks to Reinhard for starting this at
> http://wiki.cocoondev.org/Wiki.jsp?page=CocoonFeatures -
> people, please
> have a look and help us make this page real good before it is
> included
> in the website docs.
>
> And I totally agree that such a page should not be "compared to".
Yes I'm +1 too, a "compared to" was never intended and IMHO not possible
at this level.
As Sylvain said "semi-techies" are the major target group of this
document - these are people that will never download and try out Cocoon
by themselves but talk and know ;) a lot. Ok, now you could say "who
cares?" but these people *could* also be your customer or your boss who
wants to find out more on something you talk to him the whole time.
Reinhard
Re: OXF rebuttal
Posted by Bertrand Delacretaz <bd...@codeconsult.ch>.
Le Vendredi, 19 sep 2003, à 05:36 Europe/Zurich, Niclas Hedhman a écrit
:
> ...a continously evolving "Feature" or "Evaluation Overview" page is
> something else, and a good thing that is coming out of this, which
> should not
> be confrontational nor "compared with X" style....
+1 - thanks to Reinhard for starting this at
http://wiki.cocoondev.org/Wiki.jsp?page=CocoonFeatures - people, please
have a look and help us make this page real good before it is included
in the website docs.
And I totally agree that such a page should not be "compared to".
-Bertrand
Re: OXF rebuttal
Posted by Niclas Hedhman <ni...@hedhman.org>.
On Friday 19 September 2003 07:56, Stefano Mazzocchi wrote:
> On Friday, Sep 19, 2003, at 01:16 Europe/Rome, Roger I Martin PhD wrote:
> > Some things are beyond one company to achieve in one life time.
>
> Roger,
>
> while I understand that you might have felt insulted by their marketing
> action, I would suggest you to avoid being confrontational.
In principle I agree, don't get into a shit throwing contest.
But a continously evolving "Feature" or "Evaluation Overview" page is
something else, and a good thing that is coming out of this, which should not
be confrontational nor "compared with X" style.
Plain and simple.
Niclas
Re: OXF rebuttal
Posted by Stefano Mazzocchi <st...@apache.org>.
On Friday, Sep 19, 2003, at 01:16 Europe/Rome, Roger I Martin PhD wrote:
> Some things are beyond one company to achieve in one life time.
Roger,
while I understand that you might have felt insulted by their marketing
action, I would suggest you to avoid being confrontational.
This is exactly what they are looking for to show what kind of people
you get when you deal with those open source. It's like the DoS attack
on SCO: does more harm to open source than to SCO (and Eric Raymond
asked to stop it exactly for that).
Like I said before: no matter what they write, if it isn't true, it
fires back on them. And if they compare to us, it means they fear us or
customers avoid buying their software because of cocoon.
It does *NOT* matter whether or not that page is fair to us or not. We
do not need those pages to be fair, we need *tons* of unfair pages of
commercial products that try to compete with us, because that shows our
success more than anything else.
Just ignore them and keep the focus.
Take care.
--
Stefano.
Re: OXF rebuttal
Posted by Roger I Martin PhD <hy...@hypernexinc.com>.
Hi Erik,
I don't see any "In the works" or "Upcoming" on the Cocoon column of the
comparison.
As far as what Cocoon "recommends", "does not clearly encourage", sheesh,
I've got the Cocoon source code; I can do anything I want. Where Cocoon
documentation "is minimal"; remember I've got the source code. Cocoon
doesn't discourage me from doing anything.
<quote>
cocoon supports proprietary actions and XSP
</quote>
Say what?
<quote>
cocoon supports proprietary actions and XSP
</quote>
How are you planning to convince an intelligent audience that JSP is
superior to XSP when XSP extends the concept of JSP from just html to all
xml documents?
<quote>
The Cocoon sitemap was initially designed to handle linear pipelines
according to a generation / transformation / serialization pattern suited
for Web publishing. This initial limitation has been lifted and Cocoon now
supports operating independently from a Servlet container.
</quote>
Can be rewritten
<rewrite>
Yes
</rewrite>
How the first version was designed is immaterial even to the biased
comparison your making with Cocoon version 2.1.
Your examples are painfully slow, tiny and unattractive at your site.
What's choking it? Validation? The xslt2 one doesn't work. Most of them are
based on sourceforge and other .org code bases where I can go and get better
examples and plug them into other publishing frameworks.
Your mailing list is smaller than tiny; more like puny. You average about
38k of gzipped characters/month while Cocoon averages 831k of gzipped
characters/month just for their users list. Many users are on the dev list
too. These simple statistics belie your biased comparison.
You should put it at the top that you can't compare to open source because
your not and that you only support JSP and aren't anywhere close to
implementing XSP support(hint: you can get the source code from Cocoon to
get a start:-). I'm part of Cocoon's quality assurance and robustness
team(world-wide users who can peek into the source code) while you probably
have just a handfull in an internal department. When Cocoon hits an
exception, I can go right to the line of code and fix it myself instead of
waiting for the "professional help" to do it. This stuff is not rocket
science. I cannot believe that things perform as well as the left side of
your comparison would have me believe.
Why don't you note where your documentation is barely existent? At least
with Cocoon there is the source code. On your web site your documents
appear to be fulfilling the requirement of existence for getting to market
rather than being full of real-world application meat.
I recommend you remove this pseudo-comparison/marketing page because it does
not "sell" -- what are you trying to sell? Your going to have a
hell-of-a-time upkeeping this page. There are so many new things happening
with Cocoon that you need to extend your list and proclaim that OXF
implementation is "No" and Cocoon is "In the works". You appear to be a
small time blogger picking on a well-read blogger in his/her comment
sections just to increase your hits and get noticed. That is why it won't
sell. On the other hand people who get to your site some other way will
find out about Cocoon thru this pseudo-comparison and "zap" you lost a
customer(For convenience you could provide a link). The last thing you ever
want people coming to your web-site to know is the word Cocoon.
Your picking a tough market (IT developers). We're a stingy bunch:-) I
don't even begin to look at something that requires me to fill out marketing
forms just to learn about it. Wrong customer. What you want is customers
with lots of money who know nothing about software ; just want something
done. This is what the open source crowd has realized and hence open
source. Some things are beyond one company to achieve in one life time.
--
Roger
----- Original Message -----
From: "Erik Bruchez" <eb...@orbeon.com>
To: "Gianugo Rabellino" <gi...@apache.org>
Cc: <de...@cocoon.apache.org>
Sent: Thursday, September 18, 2003 2:59 PM
Subject: Re: OXF rebuttal
> Dear Gianugo,
>
> We appreciate your comments about our OXF / Cocoon comparison
> matrix. We have posted an update to reflect most of them:
>
> http://www.orbeon.com/oxf/cocoon
>
> A few additional comments below:
>
> 1. Professional Support
>
> 1. We clearly did not mean that Cocoon does not have free
> support. 2. The main idea we wanted to convey is that the
> day-to-day developers of OXF are also the people who provide
> professional support for OXF. It looks like we were unfair to
> Cocoon by not mentioning that professional support is also
> available for Cocoon. The matrix has been updated to reflect this
> better.
>
> 2. XML Validation and XPointer support
>
> In OXF, these are feature of the pipeline language itself. The
> validation feature is not about validation at parsing time (which
> is clearly supported by XML parsers) but about being able to
> validate each input and output of each component in a SAX pipeline
> with a Relax NG or W3C Schema. AFAWK this is not possible with
> Cocoon. The matrix has been updated to reflect this better.
>
> 3. J2EE Datasources
>
> The Cocoon documentation on the subject seems to be lacking. We
> have removed this item from the comparison. The lack of
> documentation also seems to affect J2EE authentication and JSP
> integration.
>
> 4. Tomcat / JSP
>
> There used to be a JSP Generator based on Tomcat's Jasper
> engine. Based on your comment, it looks like this way of calling
> JSP pages is obsolete.
>
> 5. EJB
>
> This regards the possibility to call EJBs from a pipeline without
> writing any Java code. The matrix has been updated to reflect this
> better.
>
> Regards,
>
> -Erik
>