Link Details

An opinion piece, and an opinion I don't agree with, but hey-ho...

i don't agree. AJAX may not replace JSPs. but sun will reinvent serverside components to fit with the AJAX

i totally disagree with the article too

I kind of agree with what he's trying to say. I mean, pure JSPs really aren't such a good idea. It's a much better practice to use something like Wicket or Tapestry. However, I'm not so naive as to think that AJAX is even a peer to the JSP technology. That's like all the discussions I've read about Rails replacing MySQL...

Thank you, Daniel for pointing out the most obvious thing that people are ignoring, or at least not commenting on. AJAX != JSP. Its two different things entirely.

If the author of this article is suggesting that coding in scriplets in JSP is dead, then I'd say welcome to 2002.

Its a weak article, as denoted by all of the voters against this link. I personally have never seen an article get so many negative votes.

rails replacing mysql? they must mean sqlonrails ;)

One could simply NOT put java scriptlets in the JSP's (which is the way its supposed o be anyway).

This is obviously a tongue-and-cheek article. I don't think he means they're literally dead but are getting considerably phased out. His assessment of Ajax is very accurate. I prefer using a light template tool like StringTemplate to return mini-Ajax views than JSPs, it makes the most sense.

As AJAX is becoming more and more popular, JSPs are getting further phased out. Lot of developers prefer to return chunks of HTML from the server rather than an actual dispatched forward. A lightweight and powerful template language is much more suitable here as your AJAX interface view will be an aggregation of snippets of HTML returned from the server. Doing this using JSPs would add a level of complexity that is both undesired and unneeded.

A nice discussion of this provocative topic:

http://www.theserverside.com/news/thread.tss?thread_id=45080