Tapestry vs JSF

Links:
http://java.sys-con.com/read/46050.htm
http://howardlewisship.com/blog/2004_01_01_archive.html
http://www-106.ibm.com/developerworks/library/j-jsf1/

http://howardlewisship.com/blog/2005/02/tapestry-jsf-and-fud.html
"...Erik Hatcher likes to "provoke" JSF-ers, such as David Geary, to
duplicate the Table component. The Table includes links for sorting
and paging through long contents ... these links just work, without
any configuration in the application. This is the Tapestry way -- drop
it in and let it work. JSF's approach is primarily a view component
and apparently can't duplicate this."

http://www.oreillynet.com/cs/user/view/cs_msg/48307
"Tapestry has literally taken a project that was stalled in
development hell for almost a year and finished it, rebuilt from the
groun up, in 3 months. We built it from the ground up using Tapestry.
We added things as we learned, but it was all very intuitive. First,
simple forms for customer input and simple screens for reporting."

Known implementations. Interestingly these all have their drawbacks.
Oracle's is an "early access edition", MyFaces is somewhat
proprietary, "The MyFaces version of Tiles Support requires the
MyFaces JSF implementation. It will not work with the Sun RI or any
other JSF implementation." And AjaxFaces looks the most intriguing,
but it's a commercial solution!

http://www.ajaxfaces.com/
http://www.oracle.com/technology/products/jdev/htdocs/partners/addins/exchange/jsf/index.html
http://myfaces.apache.org/components/overview.html

---------
Think I need to spend a night hosing around with JSF to evaluate it.