Link Details

very nice

Since it dont support Scala , i am sure many will try to create its replacement in Scala.

To my knowledge, there are attempts to compile Scala to GWT. I don't know how advanced these tries are.
I also saw attempts to use Vaadin with Scala.

hmm, i wonder what if google had complied byte code to JS instead of Java.

I wish the same... I am sure there is some problems related to that, otherwise why would they go for source code translation?

Unlike GWT, Vaddin is pure Java. So you can use every JVM-compatible language to write Vaadin apps. Although the Google guys call it "compilation", GWT code isn't compiled at all and has nothing to do with Java beside it uses the same syntax.

I am not sure about the nature of Vaadin. They say it is "Built on GWT-based widgets".
And it depends on what you can "compilation". If you say it is a transformation of a high level language to a lower level language closer of a platform or more portable, that's what GWT does (transforming Java to a language understood by all browsers: JavaScript). Lot of compilers actually generated C or C++ code, for example.
And to my knowledge, GWT code is Java code, just restricted on some libraries.

Actually in this case the transformation happens from a low level language to higher level language. JavaScript is a prototyped-based dynamically typed language, whereas Java has primitive types like Integers and Strings.

Never argued about the fact that a part of GWT code is written in Java, but it's Java merely in the sense of the Java syntax usage.

Vaadin uses GWT under the hood but it encapsulates these widgets that become — in the context of Vaadin — real fully Java-accessible widgets without any restrictions.

Could have done w/o the Java bashing in the article.

There was no java bashing per-se except for the mention of unexpressiveness of the language... It is important to point that out, as Javascript is far more expressive. Without mentioning this point we won't be giving javascript the respect it deserves.

Article quote:
"After all it is Java and Java is not a fun language to work with. "

The author has the right to express his opinions about Java, I have the right to disagree.

The overall article is good, though the author's love for Javascript over Java is pretty easy to read between the lines.

It would a boring blogosphere if everyone agreed.

Google's GWT doc isn't good at all as the author claims. Maybe it looks good but it actually isn't. Try to implement the RequestFactory using Google's documentation. Following their tutorial you'll fail (as I did spending a whole day...) as there a lot of information gaps.

In general the article has many superficial statements that badly reflect the real nature of GWT. However I use GWT too and I like it and hate it at the same time.