Peter Thomas has written another nice article where he compares Seam/JSF with Wicket based on the booking example application of Seam. In his tests he compared the performance characteristics (Wicket is faster) and memory usage (Wicket is lighter). Peter writes:
Wicket appears to be faster by a wide margin. [...] on the Seam / JSF side, the 20 sessions each take up about 800 KB adding up to around 16 MB total. On the Wicket side the 20 sessions add up to around 1.5 MB.
I am amazed that a couple of guys working as volunteers (none of us is paid to work on Wicket) can create something that is more innovative, faster and lighter than a billion dollar industry.
There is just one question that remains: why not compare Seam/JSF with Seam/Wicket?