Now with GWT 2, what are the advantages over wicket and likewise?

Question

Apart from the argument of Wicket\'s simplicity (that is, Wicket is a simpler system IMHO) and GWT\'s responsiveness in the client (GWT\'s client side state and JavaScript -

Answer 1

It's somewhat not fair to compare GWT with wicket (or likewise) since they are really coming from 2 different camps. The former is a framework for building JavaScript front-end applications while the latter is a classic Java web application framework.

So the points below are not as much as GWT vs. wicket but rather general list that was compiled when we decided to use GWT for advanced JavaScript/AJAX web application:

• hides drawbacks of JavaScript and cross-browser support by allowing to develop in Java and compiling to browser-specific flavor of JavaScript automatically (this is not completely true due to The Law of Leaky Abstractions but it's a major reason why GWT was created in first place - see Reveling in Constraints);
• Java is preferred by many Java developers when it gets down to advanced JavaScript/AJAX UI;
• Java development environment and tools are fully supported: Eclipse plugin, debugger, refactoring, hosted mode in Eclipse;
• JUnit tests are supported both with mock objects and in hosted mode;
• Clean integration with Java back-end (GWT-RPC);
• Relatively rich set of UI widgets with uniform look and feel;
• Availability of third-party widgets, frameworks, patterns, and examples (still limited and with a long wish list);
• Google support drives both wider acceptance/popularity and rapid advancement of the framework;
• maturing framework with 1.6+ and forthcoming 2.0 releases: (eventbus, event handlers, GUI architecture with MVP pattern, compiler optimization, etc.).

Answer 2

I can think of several reasons why GWT is a better choice than Wicket, for typical business web apps:

1. GWT is from Google. This may be unfair, but having a big and respected software company behind a tool is a huge advantage (safer to bet on it, more books and online resources, more third-party support, better IDE support, ...).
2. Server-centric web frameworks like Wicket are outdated. Modern web browsers are very powerful and getting ever more so, therefore a modern web framework should help you take advantage of that.
3. Coding directly in HTML and Javascript can never be as productive as coding in Java (from my experience, at least). Also, there are better tools for Java code (debuggers, static analysis, unit testing and code coverage, etc.).

Answer 3

I've been involved in a GWT based project for the past few months. I was, having been part of the Wicket development team for years, looking forward to a change, and expected a lot from GWT (which I've always touted as another great Java framework).

Honestly, I am disappointed when it comes to working with GWT. I feel - my whole team in fact - that productivity took a big hit. Theoretically GWT is great. But when you factor in the quirks and limitations of the framework, mediocre error reporting (particularly when it comes to serialization errors), the long compile times (anywhere between 3 - 10 minutes, and our project isn't even that big yet), the fact that when all is said and done, you still need to test for all browsers and find tweaks and workarounds, the fact that it produces a huge initial download (almost an MB, which we're cutting back gradually, but with a lot of effort), etc, etc, I feel Wicket is much easier and quicker to work with.

I don't hate working with GWT. It's still a lot better than most Java frameworks. It's just that I expected a lot more from working with it; I even expected it to be possibly nicer than Wicket. But in the end, it is just not imho. Hopefully GWT 2.0 will improve a lot of things, and hopefully some of the quirks of the Eclipse plugin will be straightened out soon too.