Slashdot Mirror
AJAX, Echo, .NET - What Impact Have They Had?
BjB asks: "We've talked about platform neutral frameworks for years, but with the recent story about AJAX threatening the desktop, it made me think about the hype around two frameworks that were supposed to bring applications to the browser: Microsoft .NET and the Java competitor Echo framework. Both technologies boast that you can write a desktop application that can also easily be exported as an identical web-based application. I know a lot of developers hailed the .NET framework as a major innovation and jumped on board. The Echo framework was the counter-attack that leveled the field. Now, over two years later, I don't think I've ever seen anything that leverages either one? Was this a short lived battle with nobody reaping the rewards, or has it actually made some in-roads?"
At least with .NET, it's still dependant on IE being used as the browser. (When we're talking easy porting of a windows .NET app to a web app)
Ajax is completely different. It is a loose framework of standards available in the most widely used browsers.
That is why we're actually seeing complex web applications now, because it is viable to deploy to your customer base without pissing off a good chunk of them.
Get off the net though and there have been rich web applications built for IE on intranets for a long long time now. They just aren't viable for a publicly accessible website.
No Comment.
AJAX is by far the closest thing to making a browser behave like a desktop app. But, I don't think that it will threaten the desktop itself any more than applets were supposed to back in the late 1990s.
I don't think a full AJAX app wouldn't meet all the guidelines of an accessible website. A small population needs to have web accessible apps (there are three people in my department of 200 that use braille browsers) in order to be able to do their work. I have a hard time believing that an AJAX site would fully meet their needs.
Now, that's not to say it can't be done. An accessible site can be built on top of an AJAX site and conversely. But it depends on the developer who takes the time to plan that part of his/her site.
Furthermore, I expect that there will be more AJAX sites out there. I don't expect that the SCTs and PeopleSofts of the world will be rushing to implement that functionality in their web packages (ever heard the story of the visually impared guy who tried to use his browser to do what is otherwise a 5 minute task in PeopleSoft? it took him 35 minutes or so--PeopleSoft since has allegedly addressed their html to make it more accessible).
Bottom line: sites should be planned to be accessible. It's a hinderance to me (I'd like to do our site in AJAX entirely but I can't) but it's the most fair for everyone.
GOBACK.
Cold fusion is only viable for closed systems.
If you're talking a web front end to any sort of distributed or enterprise system, it's simply the wrong tool for the job.
It is wonderful for web 'designers' to put out nice content with cool features, but for building true applications, no, most certainly not.
No Comment.