Slashdot Mirror
Early AJAX Office Applications
prostoalex writes "Perhaps many, who viewed Zimbra presentation from yesterday, thought about other office-related applications they would like to see moved to the Web. Richard McManus on ZDNet provides a list of the currently available AJAX apps. Did you know there was AJAX word processor, AJAX spreadsheet, AJAX calendar, AJAX presentation-building software, AJAX e-mail client, AJAX note-taking software and some other interesting applications, which, deployed on your local server, do not need installation and "just work" in a browser window?"
...does it keep my kitchen clean?
I'm still waiting for an AJAX-based browser. Just think about it! The ability to use a browser without having to install it! You just browse on over to the site!
Remember java applets?! They were suppose to do these kind of things...
I really like the way that Web apps are starting to make a comeback.
... but so was flying to the moon !!
Yes, it's true that there will always be problems with compatibility in browsers,
but at the end of the day, to make the underlying OS insignificant, it makes the adoption of alternate OS's become easier.
Who knows, maybe the pressure will cause other proprietary companies to start looking at the way they
do business ? A pipe dream now
Webservices were going to rule the computing world. You'd download apps as you needed them from vendors, then they would automatically bill you for the rental, but only for the time spent using the actual product.
That idea died a horrible death, despite Microsoft's best efforts to make the Network the Computer.
Now webservices are back, but instead of building miniature application control building blocks, the entire application interface is downloaded to your browser. Everything immediate runs client-side and anything that needs a backend is sent upstream to the server. No more trying to keep a network connection alive between the client PC and the network server. Everything can be kept very asynchronous.
It's no surprise that this is the way things are evolving. Even the first CGI programs foretold this type of usage pattern. You'd get an interface on the client side and the heavy processing would be done on the server. But now with faster connections and the ability to run more stuff on the client side, a lot of processing can be and has been pushed off the server and onto the client browser.
It's very interesting, and quite a pleasant break from the barrage of boring sysadmin-specific stories here.
Jesus saved me from my past. He can save you as well.
Stop with the acronyms for goodness sakes.
AJAX is a floor cleaning product.
I'm sorry to say this, but there are too many people who think something is cool because it uses the latest hip technology. Nobody cares that it is AJAX, they just care that it works well and does what they want.
The sooner OSS and other people writing software out there realise this the better.
Rant over
..hello GoogleOS! Platfrom-independent, all online, all the applications you need. Who cares if it's viewed out of IE?
I think I speak for most Slashdotters when I say 'Cool. Sounds neat.' while understanding only 80% of what you just said.
Great, so now the network being down means I can get absolutely no work done.
I'd like this if they sold $20 dumb terminals to use it, but I paid a lot of money for a computer that can run applications locally without constantly going to the network.
And just in case they mentioned that that's not a concern in one of those 40 linked pages, no, I didn't read all the articles, so feel free to yell at me now.
There's also an Open Source "Todo Lists" application called Tudu Lists.
You can check it out on SourceForge : http://tudu.sourceforge.net.
And you can use the live site : http://tudu.ess.ch.
Everything's free and Open Source (GPL), so you can check out how it works.
Sadly, the spreadsheet doesn't work with Konqi at all. None of the text you enter either shows up or gets saved. In Mozilla
I'm carrying on playing, because this is potentially very, very cool technology indeed.
I'm old enough to remember when discussions on Slashdot were well informed.
People have been doing this stuff using the same methodology since < 2003 and have been dealing with the pros and cons eversince. Convinsing PMs that the technology has potential was a lot of trouble then, but since the term AJAX was coined the situation has become the opposite; we are now trying to point out the pitfalls.
The power of buzzwords in people's minds is astonishing. Guess our brain is too dependent on abstraction/handles.
S5 is not an AJAX app. It uses plain JavaScript and some CSS. Nothing like XMLHttpRequest is used in S5. To create an S5 presentation, one needs only text editor. The javascript and CSS is only for the presentation and has nothing to do with the actual slide creation process.
--- Baishampayan Ghose b.ghose gmail com
Here's another example of an AJaX e-mail client written using the Echo2 Web Framework. This one is very much no frills (it's an example app for Echo2) but it does include complete MPL/LGPL/GPL source.
My Java tip for the near future is Echo2 or something like it. Sophisticated AJAX without writing a line of HTML or JavaScript.
BUT.. i'm yet to be convinced they are at a stage they can take on an exe. I wouldn't want to start a major application to find some future release of IE breaks it horribly. i use wxpython for the moment it's the closest thing i've come across so far to being truely platform independant with all the bells and whistles.
i'd be majorly chuffed if i could so the same things via a web browser however.
If you mod me down, I will become more powerful than you can imagine....
The Ajax apps all look extremely impressive, but I do believe inconsistent UI will eventually plateau the adoption. Developers love to play the artist when there's a clean slate, and everyone will have their own set of icons and widgets.
Developers need to understand that once you're over 25 years old, you don't care to learn brand new interfaces all over again. The closer it looks to something familiar (your Windows/Mac OS UI), the better. For God's sake, if it doesn't look at Windows, at least make the metaphors intuitive.
My recent pet peeve is tiny little icons, just for the sake of tiny little icons. I'm familiar with the standard "Open", "Save", "Copy", "Cut", "Paste", and "Print" icons. That saves real estate over text, and saves me time.
However, With monitors getting bigger and bigger, unique icons will NO LONGER OFFER THE SAME BENEFIT. I'm not going to hover my mouse pointer over every single 8-pixel-by-8-pixel icon you have, just to forget it the next time around because you lined up 50 of them on the toolbar like lucky charms. If there's room for text, and if that saves time, put the text in!
Things where one user needs to access an application from many locations (email for example), or where a group of distributed users need have instant access to shared information (calendar, notes) .. great idea to have a remotely hosted application or data store.
.. I'm not sure of course, but I rather doubt the capability of a javascript based spreadsheet. It might be ok for holding a small set of data and a handful of equations, but I wouldn't much like to view the last 10 years of accounts of a medium sized company with one. It'd be considerably slower than a properly compiled and optimized application.
But for word processing? Spreadsheets? That seems like a waste of bandwidth, and an unnecessary security risk. I've been working remotely for the last 2 years (300 miles from the company office). I've never encountered a situation where a remote service text editor would be preferable to a local app. Given my flaky internet connection that would really be a very bad thing. Whatsmore
http://twitter.com/onion2k
Guess we've managed to test the scalability of the implementations already.... cute names, though!
Ooooh and we could call it Internet Explorer!
Sounds an awful lot like what Java applets were supposed to give you, before crappy implementations of the early JVMs killed them.
It's official. Most of you are morons.
Check out jotlive.com
This is an awesome collaboration tool. If anyone has some insights on how this works (technically), I'd appreciate it.
I was under the impression that you can only poll from client to server, not the reverse, yet this application shows instant change (so no 10 sec continuous polling)
Opera 8.50, on Debian:
I'm old enough to remember when discussions on Slashdot were well informed.
You know, this could actually go somewhere in certain corporate environments. The key here is application support internally. Run a local server with all the apps. It would be great if all you had to do to get a new workstation up is put the favorites in a login script. Then the user has all of his/her apps based upon department needs. No fuss, no issues. Need to swap workstations? No problem, the apps are always there. I know a lot of organizations that have users work off of network drives anyways, so when the network is down, they still didn't get any work done. Now about MS word compatibility...
Having only just managed to ween my co-workers off a ton of needless javascript in their applications 'improvements' in web technologies such as AJAX are a concern to me. Having read all about 'Web 2.0' technologies, I'm left to wonder where the business case for all this while STILL maintaining standards in accessibility comes from?
Please note: accessibility means equal access for ALL, it is not a term to differentiate disabled internet users from their able-bodied peers.
So now we have we have to use libraries that work for IE and every other browser separately, we then have rewrite it all for people using accessibility aids that often use scraping techniques to get content from the page and wont update unless the page refreshes, so we have to write a legacy version anyway (of course, you can make the call that the chance of getting sued is low enough not to bother).
Before people say we have to write a ton of code to account for different browsers and accessibility combinations, I work supplying web apps to public sector education bodies and none of my applications require wild cul-de-sacs of code for special scenarios.
We have only just started mastering equal access for all in web applications as it is, the last thing we need is a new generation of web developers who think that "omg cool functionality kthx" > accessibility
Is there a "-1, Obvious" to go with that "+1, Funny"?
Great. What a wonderful way to write applications that DONT ACTUALLY DO ANYTHING.
Call me when you get PhotoShop, Doom, Oracle9 and Soundtrack running at a decent speed in a web browser.
For now, I'll stick to C code thanks.
Yes. For rather obvious security reasons, XMLHttpRequest is limited to making requests to the host the script originated from. Also it would be way slower than a normal web browser. Plus completely inaccessible, which is illegal in many places.
That falls apart when the browser that isn't the "latest and most popular" doesn't support the technologies your AJAX browser uses.
Bogtha Bogtha Bogtha
I used s5 for my Masters thesis presentation. It worked great, but I don't know if I would call it "AJAX". It's just combines XHTML and CSS, very well.
"Oppression and harassment is a small price to pay to live in the land of the free." -- Montgomery Burns.
Back when I started computers, we had dumb terminals with applications running on mainframes. I had no ability to write my own code; I had no right to execute CPU cycles for anything other than work. And nor could I, as CPU cycles were audited and 'billed' against each department.
And so we will return. The server based module of applictaion licencing will suit the likes of Microsoft enormously. They want a constant revenue stream, not just intermittent ( but huge ) income on new product releases.
More insidiously though, this move will start to erode our usgae 'rights' again . Little by little we will be discouraged from installing applications on our PC's.
There are good aspects to server hosted applications and data storage, but also some very bad ones.
Open Source Drum Kit, LPLC deve board - mjhdesigns.com
Stop worrying about the risks of nuclear power and start worrying about the risks of not using nuclear power.
It's enough to make JS do more than just rollovers and people call it AJAX. I hate that. Not everything that has draggable pseudowindows is "AJAX application". DHTML used to be name for those, but it's not cool anymore... heh
Well, it seems that the idea is not really new. This guys are already offering a web OS (or at least a desktop) and a bunch of web office applications. All AJAX based.
And (I happen to know these guys), they are turning open source. The official announcement should be next week, methinks...
mod me up scottie!
The biggest disadvantage of ajax that I can see, is that it's written in javascript and there is no debugger available for the various web browsers (except Mozilla).
Developing a large application without a debugger is not fun.
Why not use flash? It seems to do everything that ajax can do, but it has a IDE and debugger available and there is the added advantage that it's cross platform (ajax requires that you write a seperate version for IE and Mozilla).
Everyone seems to be running around raving about AJAX applications. Why do you all think AJAX is so good? Really? It's cool if you need to update a webpage without reloading (and particularly for server-push), but why do I want server-push functionality in a word processor, spreadsheet, calendar, presentation-building software or note-taking software (note, I've taken e-mail client out of that list, as server push is actually useful there)?
Sure, if these were tools to allow multiple people to work on the same document simultaneously, but these all seem to share data only after it's been saved back to the server. As someone else pointed out, the presentation application doesn't even use AJAX!
Would people please stop using AJAX to mean "Really cool looking Javascript application"? If Javascript applications excite you, fine, you're welcome to them, but please get the terms right...
that Google will come out with it's Online GoogleOffice Suite here and eventually a Web Deployable OS with unstructured XML DB will soon be reality. Like I say, People will make lot's of Software, it's the impeccable timing of Google, that will make their products shine, be it Office products or others.
Scott McNealy to Michael: "Suck my Sun!" Michael Dell to Scott : "Lick my Dell!"
The problem with Java applets is they require too much to be installed on the client side. This has big security and performance implications
Security? XMLHttpRequest is very cool, but (albeit for reasons not the same as those you gave for Java), it's likely to fall off its pedestal very soon in the face of these security problems.
In short, assuming you have the functionality turned on (I assume there is a way to turn it off in present browsers, though I haven't checked), XMLHttpRequest breaks the assumption that web pages only record what you're doing when you "submit" a request (don't think this applies to Flash, but it's normally obvious when a flash app is being used).
In short, it's theoretically possible for a site to be receiving information about pretty much every action you carry out within a browser window, and practically *quite* possible (and likely) for less than trustworthy sites to be receiving information you'd rather they didn't (if you knew about it); I could go further, but the article pretty much explains it well.
"Slashdot - News and Chat Sites Deviant". (Click "homepage" link above for details).
Don't forget Meebo, the browser based IM client, perfect for those computers you can't install AIM on. http://www.meebo.com/
are not wordprocessing, spreadsheet, or even presentation junk.
The most important apps in an office are the ones that you fill out and pass around paperwork with.
sad, but true
Please, for the good of Humanity, vote Obama.
I don't understand how you can use X-windows as an example of a standardized GUI and still quote two GUI kits in the same sentence. X-windows is still seriously broken in the way that it doesn't enforce a single, unified and standardized interface. Until there's only one window manager and widget set, the problem has not been solved.
The owls are not what they seem
A AJAX WebBrowser can be useful to visit banned websites ? But for that we have to first create millions of AJAX Browsers sites. HOWZTHAT
It's nice because it allows you to do real-time client (etc.) searches asynchronously which allows you to get a ton done with only one real page load.
I've seen some decent commercial and free AJAX implementations as well, but outside of Google and Avalon, they seem more focused on "cool" than "useful".
Free sex is like a warm toilet seat.... feels good but makes you wonder who was there before you.
It might just be me -- and this might sound like a personal whinge -- but I am interested to here what other people have to say.
/. posts - the technology is nothing new and its just a silly acronym. But I digress. My biggest problem is that I like my major applications -- email, word processor, spreadsheet, html editor, whatever - to a seperate *unique* presence on the (*hides head in shame*) Windows task bar. It is so much easier to recognise the application on the taskbar when it has its own entry invariably with a unique icon, rather than just being one of possibly tens of browser windows. Invariably I end up loosing my web application in a jumble of other browser windows and/or tabs, or thinking its just another browser windows, accidently close it. Then there is always the problem of the browser crashing, often because I am also browsering, and thus loosing whatever important documents or email I also have open.
:) I'd much rather download a small executable that embeds a browser window within some sort of unique container (if that's the right terminology) that runs as a unique program, with its own task bar entry, and its own icon. So, for example, I could launch gmail.exe and it would have its own presence on the task bar even though it was essentially just gecko rending the gmail website. It could even extend functionality, allowing one to minimise it to tray and so forth.
I find these AJAX applications very impressive, even if - according to the endless
As I said, it may well just be me, but perhaps I'm not alone
Just my 0.02c worth.
I still think that shit like this is the future. A web based office suite, for example, has these nice features compared to PC-installs:
- less or no hassle with sw maintenance,
- OS-agnostic,
- possible to use pay-per-use schemes (nice for provider, so consumers may get the terminal free with a subscription like in the mobile business),
- possible to have automatic backup and version control
The only one loosing out in that scheme is Microsoft, unless they can reposition themselves once again. It's hard to see how they can squeeze $100 of license fees out of a web terminal.
Now that I saw quite a few people dumping Outlook for web-based gmail, which admittedly has less features but just *always works* and *works safely*, I belief maybe the time has come.
My ideal future:
Gamers --> go to consoles
Office workers --> use web services
Geeks --> use PCs
We'll have to pay more for our PCs of course, those being no longer mainstream commidities, but at least MS could be dead and buried...
Shut UP SHUT UP you're giving stupid people stupid ideas!
http://www.caldera.com/2005forum/sponsors/
AJAX appears to be the new Display Postscript...
AJAX sounds like it will be a boon for naturally based web applications.
I don't see office applications as being naturally web based applications, they seem to be very natural living on my desktop. I can't see why I would need to be connected to write a paper or do my budget.
On the innocent side it just seems like a misdirected project.
On the sinister side it seems similar to e-books....another way to take away something I have come to take for granted as possessing.
My word processor may be old, but it is mine.
I can just see the bull shit now.
"Oh, you don't own the AJAX office suite, you were only renting the use of it. Since your lease is up you cannot use it to view your old work... unless you want to pay us more money"
AJAX is a floor cleaning product.
Actually, Ajax is the name of two warriors in the Trojan wars. The name was then misappropriated for a floor cleaning product (heroic cleaning?), but I suppose as you demonstrate, people these days don't know their classics anymore.
If the term "Ajax" becomes associated with a dynamic web display technology, I think that's a step up from floor cleaning.
Why don't you just create a shortcut to the browser executable that passes the URL to the website as its first argument? You can even give it its own icon.
Bogtha Bogtha Bogtha
Yes, but they didn't catch on because the technology was cumbersome and inflexible. Sun just reimplemented the same toolkits and languages people had been using for a decade before, and that turned out to be a bad match for the web. Add poor browser integration, the fact that Sun never opened it up, numerous security problems in the Java runtime, garbage collection bugs, bloat, and sluggishness, and you can easily see why it didn't catch on.
AJAX, on the other hand, is or will be supported by every browser. It's lightweight, builds on HTML and JavaScript, and is a generation ahead of Java and Swing when it comes to GUIs.
what, you mean like a Java Applet?
Please reply to this posts with links to AJAX games. Multiplayer, preferably.
I'm suprised with all this AJAX hype no one has mentioned a web browser! Yeah an AJAX web browser, that supports AJAX. That would be tight.
Taken from their site:
Buzzwords Compliance: AJAX, Web 2.0, Tagging, RSS
Kiko also has usability in mind:
Be Soothed By Kiko's Pleasant Colors - Pastels are good for the soul.
Brent Jones
A web browser is not an Operating System.
A web browser is supposed to view html files.
I see little point in running an office application inside my webbrowser.
Don't we all remember thin clients and mainframes.
When the server goes down...everyone goes home.
How is this any different?
- Jesse McNelis
...and that is all I have to say about that.
http://jessta.id.au
Web applications have particular characteristics in that they tend to run within a web-browser and use particular sets of technologies for both GUI, data representation and communication. But it is not necessarily the only or even the best way. There is a difference between deploying MS Office local to one machine or running it across a network with the documents on another remote fileserver. Many applications, although installed locally will update versions or load new plugin functionality across the net. The administrator must make many judgements on what characteristics they want including performance, maintainability, security, remote access, user training etc etc. And then decide how best to deploy the application.
I believe web applications are evolving on the back of web pages and thus on the back of web browsers. We can view traditional web page rendering and navigation as the original web service. As the services get more diverse so the browser will need to provide a greater variety of capabilities, including being designed from the ground up to be maliable via plugins. The browser becoming a lightweight framework into which the right components are loaded from the net to create the application required. See flock for some interesting moves in this direction.
Ultimately will the browser be the web OS? In the same way that windows/linux etc provide an useful abstraction of the hardware, with the browser provide a similar abstraction of the web?
Sorry about this being muddled but I'm writing as I think.
-- "Can't sleep, clowns will eat me!"
In order:
1. It would probably take about fifteen minutes, maybe less, to write a handler that does a server-side HTTP request to another site. The browser encapsulates a GET request in Ajax, the server actually executes the request, munges the content, and returns it to the browser. It's not the same as direct client to server content, but it's close.
2. Yes, it'd be way slower. Unless for some reason you couldn't get to the third server at all, in which case it becomes the only option. (Not like this is a likely usage scenario.)
3. No reason to think it couldn't be designed for accessibility, although it'd sure be difficult. The principal issue would be that the sites you're browsing to might not be designed for accessibility. And incidentally, I've seen plenty of sites where the owners haven't seemed too concerned with accessibility requirements.
How about offering signed downloads of the frontend as firefox extensions?
And stuff the Opera, Mozilla and IE users. I'm a Firefox user and I'd not support that.
Running script directly from webservers is a security risk preserved for the completely retarded, which is exactly why Java applets never took off
No, applets never took off because of the crappy early implementations of the JVM and incompatibilities between MS's JVM and Sun's one. Java was also a little ahead of its time in terms of resource requirements; it's only recently been the case that low- to mid-end PCs can expect good responsiveness using GUI Java apps.
It's official. Most of you are morons.
Maybe a nice, usable web based calendaring solution will solve me having to share .pst files because our web based pop3 email system can't do it!
On the other hand, maybe it wont. The internet here is only partially stable and we dont have the budget for a dedicated web server (although I'd love it if we did). As they always say in a school setting... "maybe next year".
I enjoy developing web apps, but I don't see myself diving into ajax or, in all honesty, having any real need for it. The only time my applications really need to dynamically change text is on the menu's (expandable menu's, big hit), and I already do that with "DHTML" or, javascript + html... with no need to call XML ibraries.
The combination of AJAX with dynamic flash (plus current cultural toyboxes' evolution) seem ripe for a fairly high-end audio re-mixing app. Tie it into gmail where you can store and tag your samples, tie it into google maps to blog your geotagged mixes :) By golly...
Get it? There would be a somewhat limited set of functionality, but in the same way we're seeing the AJAX fad "eat" our existing application space, I'm suggesting that we regurgiate that (along with open source API's for server-built flash content) to reproduce Audacity or gnusound, and/or do a DJ-mix bit, instead of OpenOffice, duh. Office apps are boring, hello! Most folks want a rich media experience, we know that much.
One particular beauty here is that most remixers *want* high-end hardware, but don't really need that much bandwidth between their interface and the machine (just need high throughput internally for machine processing and storage). Interface latency would obviously be an issue, but with flash you can at least leave some of that to the client. Then the problem becomes: how do you hook up 2 USB turntables through your PDA and map them to in-browser controls? ;)
So: build it. Hire me to help, whatever.
Ben
Was it a bat I saw? Racecar. Stack cats. A man, a plan, a cat, a ham, a yak, a yam, a hat, a canal--Panama!
How about an AJAX WYSIWYG Drag & Drop webpage layout / HTML editor? I don't care if it's compliant with all those buzzwords, but I do want to hit a page, drag GUI and JavaScript objects into it, drag them around, mark them up with styles and links, then save it. With authentication for the editor - everyone else sees it as a readonly regular webpage. With all the current HTML features, viewable in IE/Firefox/Safari/Opera. That feature should have been part of the first (or at least second) wave of the Web. Is it part of this AJAX wave?
--
make install -not war
What's wrong with having the man-in-the-middle (proxy server) simply rendering the page in the browser of choice and sending the image (ala VNC) back to the requesting client. You could use an imagemap to have the links still work. Wouldn't this get past all the incompatibilities of an old browser (I mean, what old browser doesn't support images + image maps?).
I built a couple of apps already using a combination of qooxdoo, sajax and jason. I see myself doing many more, you can do some amazing interfaces with that combination.
Got Code?
The Ajax apps all look extremely impressive, but I do believe inconsistent UI will eventually plateau the adoption. Developers love to play the artist when there's a clean slate, and everyone will have their own set of icons and widgets.
HTML and CSS can use stupid widgets and mouse-over image swaps, but most sites do not.
AJAX just dynamically writes and updates HTML and CSS, so why do you think it'll be any different?
$8.95/mo web hosting
If you're referring to the resolution ouput of the video card, that would work, but with the users I've worked with, the images are often fine at a high resolution, but text throughout the OS and all apps is just too small to read (esp. with 19??x1200 15" laptop screens). Adjusting the font size at the OS level hasn't worked well from Windows 3.1 through XP because many apps don't seem to check font sizes, so many dialog boxes are unusable. I haven't used linux as a desktop OS enough to have played around with font sizes to know if the problem exists there or not.
Everything. Think about it. It's hairy and horrible and deeply, deeply wrong.
But more seriously, it would break any Ajax, Flash, or Java on the site you're browsing to.
(Wait. Maybe this isn't such a bad idea fter all.)
If applications exist on the owner's server, and aren't installed and run locally, then how am I going to be able to pirate them?
You see? You see? Your stupid minds! Stupid! Stupid!
I am actually coding a html based Quake engine.
:D
There will be a "engine" module, with complex code, initilalization, magic and hacks. And the gamelogic modules, with much readable code, easy to hack and enhance. To everyone to make "mods".
Actually the mods only run inside Mozilla because reuse some graphics, but the "compiled" code may be designed to run on any non-mozilla and mozilla brownser.
Adding some ajax features may hable multiplayer. So you can have some "tanks" games with the feel of good old Atari2600
-Woof woof woof!
or for that matter, video. Cameraphone blogging is big, even if you could just create a soundtracked slideshow I think people would love it. Doesn't necessarily have to be AJAX, but as I said... fad. The server hardware wouldn't have to be so hefty or high-bandwidth if we started with PDA/cellphone mdeia.
Was it a bat I saw? Racecar. Stack cats. A man, a plan, a cat, a ham, a yak, a yam, a hat, a canal--Panama!
When I first started playing with Java Applets as an undergrad in 1997, my 75 MHz Pentium tricked out with 256 MB of RAM was TOO slow running Java.
In 2003, we decided that XUL was too poorly documented so we developed an XML language for designing GUIs, that kept all the logic on the server and described widgets to the client machine. The client ran in Java. The language was a bit verbose, and our 400 MHz Pentium II machines really struggled, but when we upgraded to 800 MHz w/ 512 MB RAM clients, it ran decently for all but the largest data supplies to listboxes...
Now we can run AJAX on our 1.5 - 4 GHz machines with 512 MB - 2 GB of RAM and we're supposed to be impressed at how much more efficient it is?
The idea of the Applet was to move SOME processing to the client to take advantage of our FAST 200 MHz clients instead of the true dumb-terminal/mainframe model... that is even more the case here.
I'm not convinced that AJAX is more powerful, just the machines are faster.
Alex
Anybody else remember when Microsoft said that the next version of Office was going to be a webpage where people would log in and basically "rent" the app instead of putting the app on their computer and buying it? They called it Office.NET (it was back before .NET was the framework. They had grand plans of slapping .NET at the end of all their software.) Office.NET turned into Office 2003 and the .NET moniker turned into their new framework.
;)
And now we finally have office apps in webpages. And not by Microsoft.
What I'd like to see is a proper contact management application. It could be AJAX, but the technology doesn't really matter. Something that enables you to link notes, organisations and keywords to contacts, and record details of the conversations you've had with them, and when you next need to contact them and what for.
:-)
So you could look at Joe Bloggs, and see you've called him on Tuesday, gave him some details about blah, and need to call him back next week sometime, after you've spoken to John Random. Or when Foo Bar calls, you can refer to your notes on him, realise he's from X Incorporated, and know he was trying to sell you ninja turtles.
And so on.
Ideally, it would integrate with GMail or other mail clients, so you could see all your correspondance (email, phonecall and meeting notes, etc) in one nifty interface. I also think it should be able to sync up with your mobile. ie you connect your mobile, and it loads your recent call list, and propmts you to enter details on who you called and why, for each received and dialed call.
You wouldn't necessarily want it accessible from your mobile -- you can't see the screen and talk at the same time, unless you have a smartphone with handsfree, but even then, the interface would probably limit you somewhat.
If I was a Google employee, I'd use my 20% time to put this into GMail...
Quidquid latine dictum sit, altum videtur.
When Java came out, Microsoft controlled about 85% of the Market, Apple about 8%, and the OTHERS (OS/2, Engineering UNIX stations, etc. of which Solaris was a part) was the rest...
Sun only put Java out for Solaris/Microsoft, so write-once, run-anywhere was write once, run on Windows/Solaris.
The Mac Java was always MUCH laters and much buggier...
If Sun shipped Java for the Mac, then as a cross-platform environment, it would have had a purpose. Back then, cross-platform meant Windows/Mac, or DOS/Windows/Mac...
Sun ignored OS/2, the Mac, DOS, or ANY platform with usage... which made the write-once, run-anywhere POINTLESS...
The only cross-platform advantage was theoretically Windows on non-Intel chips... which not only was a non-existance market, but Sun didn't always ship Java for it...
Sun killed Java through stupidity.
Alex
Shouldn't that be GtuGdu Lists?
Hey, I just came across another AJAX email client in addition to the one mentioned in the article! I figured you guys would want to check it out, since I haven't seen it mentioned here on /. yet.
You need to identify the new concept and give it a new name to create a the buzz around and thus create an intellectual and economic activity around it. You need also to make-it hip to attract people. Many scholars argue, that the scientific innovation process is not very different from artistic creation (strong program), people need "hip" and "fashion", at any time, there is always more fashionable, sexy, hip, buzzword compliant technology (called it what you want) scientific approach than others, and this is exactly what is happening with AJAX now. Basically, scientific and and artistic innovation follow the same sociologic and cultural patterns. This area of research is called "Sociology of scientific Innovation", One of the most fascinating disciplines I have learned at the university
f ic_knowledge
Here are some entry links in Wikipedia.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strong_program
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sociology_of_scienti
and an intersting controversy :
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sokal_Hoax
You can also use the Bookmarks toolbar in the web browser for this. Both Firefox and MSIE have this feature built in, not sure about Opera or the others though. The websites can even set their own special icon too.
Security patches will break a bunch of features necessary to AJAX applications.
Microsoft will not permit browser-based office suits, ever.
If AJAX doesn't get broken on IE6, you can be assured that it will not work properly on IE7.
I can see it now, "IE's not done till AJAX doesn't run!"
Think I'm paranoid? Microsoft developed a free browser (IE), and *never* sold it, spending hundreds of millions on development in order to plow the mere possibility of browser apps running in an OS independent Netscape.
They've done it once already; to protect the validity of that extermination effort, they'll have to do it again.
Most likely, this is what the IE7 'rebirth' is about. More eyecandy, less compatability, and prevent XUL/AJAX/any-browser-based dynamic software from working properly.
Require the *latest* IE7 for everything (office updates, MSN, etc. . ), and do your best to drive the other apps out of the market place. If necessary, pay large organizations NOT to switch to firefox.
AJAX is one of Microsofts nightmares. Expect it to get crushed.
WhiteWolf666 an exBush supporter. All you new-school,compassionate,save the children Republicans can rot in hell
This must be a new troll, I haven't seen it before.
... cmon even windows XP you can just gor RUN-compmgmt.msc , Run-devmgmt.msc and RUN-lusrmgr.msc ... In system preferences, though handy, needs to be brought upto standard ... and SHOKE HORROR ... maybe managing some other parts of the OS Thats the problem with closed souce, everyones beavering away at there little bit and no one is managing the big picture.
Im still finding thr Mac desktops lagging behind Windows IMHO (not starting a flamewar here) Finder cant seem to browse directories containing large numbers of files, Its Impossible to navigate the GUI mouseless unlike windows which can be ALt-Tab's, Shift-Tab'd etc. Really the most important part they need to fix is the system preferences
Hmm.... Definitely troll-ish, but not very reusable. 2/10.
Next!
WhiteWolf666 an exBush supporter. All you new-school,compassionate,save the children Republicans can rot in hell
Comment removed based on user account deletion
I wonder if anyone has already built an AJAX image editor? It would work wonders for a photo organizing website, among other things.
"Did you know there was AJAX word processor, AJAX spreadsheet, AJAX calendar, AJAX presentation-building software, AJAX e-mail client, AJAX note-taking software and some other interesting applications, which, deployed on your local server, do not need installation and "just work" in a browser window?"
Let's see: word processor--didn't feel like signing up for an account. Spreadsheet--works in Firefox 1.0/Mac, but not Safari 1.3. Overall, has a long way to go--can't use arrow keys to move the active box in the grid, for example. And I doubt it's possible to recreate a zillion other useful features from a binary spreadsheet app, like dragging a cell's corner to fill lower rows. Calendar--wouldn't load at all in FF or Safari. Presentation--it's not AJAX. Email client--ha! instead of linking to Gmail, one of two programs that POPULARIZED AJAX (the other being google maps), the link leads to a nonexistant product from Yahoo. The note thing works but is pretty simple--feels like a bright student's DHTML project.
Dear Slashdot: next time you want to mess with the site, add a rich-text editor for comments.
More reasons applets suck:
- Cannot assume most browsers have it turned on
You can't assume browsers have turned on JavaScript either, so your AJAX solution won't work in that case.
- Full-page UI (i.e. not just in a little rectangle) is harder
No it isn't. You simply open a new window.
- Java loading slow gives trademark 'grey square'
It need not - this is just bad coding and nothing specific to Java.
AJAX takes off because it can reach over 90% of users, and especially the mainstream ones.
It doesn't. It reaches only the users with browsers which support the latest JavaScript.
AJAX allows the full DOM and has an excellent familiar object model for manipulating the DOM (Javascript)
And there are Applet APIs for doing this.
AJAX pages while loading look like a loading web page.
So so applets if well written.
AJAX is a floor cleaner, Ajax is a (er, two) hero of Greek Mythology. That's the beauty of a trademark. Just like we can call junk mail spam without being harassed by Hormel, but we can't call it SPAM.
Anyway, in the translation I read they were names Aias.
As far as I can tell, the term AJAX was coined to allow consultants a way to bill more money for doing the same work. If they just described how they were going to build a dynamic web application to a client PHB, his eyes would glaze over, but if they tell him they're going to build him a webside using AJAX, his PHB Buzzword Fetish kicks in and suddenly the consultant can bump his billing rate up 10-20% for doing the exact same thing he would have done anyway.
If I don't put anything here, will anyone recognize me anymore?
Wow, Decaff, you're really working overtime to tell us what is theoretically possible with Java applets. Tell you what... How about you give a URL to *one* non-trivial applet that embodies everything you're talking about. Something like Google Maps, Flickr, etc.
- Like most Ajax apps, it must load in less than 1 second.
- It must not load with the awful gray square or gratuitous Sun/Java logos.
- It must run in the full page and handle window resizes well.
- It must use the browser's native widget set (show me good Tiger widgets if I'm running on OSX Tiger).
- It must not care what JVM it's running on. Write once run anywhere, you know. Don't force me to endure a 25 MB download just to run your Java applet.
Not hard right? Well, point us to one.
Nobody's doing it because, even though it's possible, it's just not worth the time! I wrote a proof of concept Java applet 6 months ago that embodied all of these requirements. I realized halfway through that I should have just used Ajax. Writing a decent Java applet required way too much manual effort.
- Scott
p.s. I recommend turning Java off in your browser. A number of evil websites use Java applets to evade popup blockers. Most people will never even discover that it isn't enabled.
Even if developing so called thick client apps for multiple platforms, you still have to deal with this.
Sure, you can contain the core of your business logic in some well written ANSI C++ but, generally, the UI code will be much bigger than the rest of the app, and you still have to code to the different libraries.
Testing is still an arduous task. Making the apps 508 compliant can still be difficult.
What AJAX really provides is simplified deployment (and marketing foofoo). Where it really hurts is dev and debugging.
----- If communism is a system where the government owns business, what do you call a system where business owns govern
Wow, Decaff, you're really working overtime to tell us what is theoretically possible with Java applets.
:)
I'm not working overtime - it is easy
Tell you what... How about you give a URL to *one* non-trivial applet that embodies everything you're talking about. Something like Google Maps, Flickr, etc.
Actually, I can't! Just because this is possible, doesn't mean that most people do it, and I admit this. A good applet is like a good Visual Basic program - hard to find! However, I'm going on about this because things should be better than AJAX. GUIs should not be a matter of hacking about with JavaScript. GUIs should not be sending a high volume of messages back and forth over the internet. GUIs should be able to handle megabytes of information in fractions of a second (the idea of a serious large spreadsheet in AJAX is bizarre!)
I do have to comment on one of your requirements, which I think is inappropriate:
It must not care what JVM it's running on. Write once run anywhere, you know. Don't force me to endure a 25 MB download just to run your Java applet.
Why on earth should I write an applet that runs on Java 1.1.8, when Java 5.0 is available? That download (which is NOT 25MB!) will allow you to run any applet, not just mine.
I put a question back to you: "Show me an AJAX page that will run on ANY browser, not just modern ones. I should not have to download tens of megabytes of browser just to run your JavaScript". Get my point?
Hmmm, sounds like you want what MS calls an HTA (html application). Basically, an HTML file with an HTA extension. You could drop it on your desktop, and it could connect to the "live" web application, and give you pretty Icons, customized menubar, yada yada yada.
----- If communism is a system where the government owns business, what do you call a system where business owns govern
Before the word "accessible" goes the way of so many other techie words that are now so ambiguos that they are effictivly meaningless, I'd like to suggested that we find a different way to say that something won't have any alternate accessibility features. To me "inaccessible" means, "down" or "not functioning properly."
Stored procedures only provide you a portion of that insulation. Suppose you go and move the database from mySQL to Oracle because you have a ten-fold increase in transactions. Suppose you go from a single box to a DB cluster.
Neither of these changes would affect the screen being presented to the end user but it would affect the logic that generates that screen. So you could either go in an touch every single page and update them to the new DB pointers and files or you could leave that back with the controller/business logic level and leave the page alone.
That was my point about insulation.
--- I wish I could hear the soundtrack to my life. That way I'd know when to duck.
You're right. We absolutely should not allow individuals any responsibility to control their systems and data if they're not highly trained to do so. Being able to do "enough to get the job done" isn't good enough today.
Instead, we should force them to use third party services, via a slow and unreliable link, administered by unknown people whose qualifications are probably as good as those who "designed" all the web sites using "HTML" in the late 90s, where the security guarantees are probably much less than those that allowed large numbers of credit card numbers to leak from major financial firms several times recently, and the back-ups are probably less robust than those at companies whose own IT staff can administer them and verify that they are working, and the data protection comes with no guarantees and you couldn't rely on any you did get anyway because the service is provided from some cheap labour country using former call centre staff with no laws to look after personal information, using user interfaces designed by those same "web programmers" from the late 90s, which could be automatically "upgraded" in a way that removed your favourite feature or introduced a critical bug at any time, thus creating a single, highly probably point of failure for every person doing every job at the company that is completely beyond the company's control.
On second thought, maybe that's THE DUMBEST IDEA I'VE EVER HEARD IN MY LIFE.
Yeah, that'll be it. :-)
If you disagree, post your argument. (-1, Overrated) isn't your personal censorship tool for views you don't like.
Capitalization doesn't (generally) make a difference for trademarking. And we can call junkmail "spam" not because of capitalization differences but because doing so doesn't identify a product.
The origin of the name "Ajax" is greek mythology, and that's where the trademark derives from. Of course, the trademark is still legal, but that doesn't change the history or derivation.
Furthermore, the term "AJAX" does denote something distinct from "dynamic web application" and refers to sites like Google Maps, Google Mail, and Yahoo! Mail. Given that it is new APIs and new software, you can bet that it's going to cost the client more, given that there are fewer toolkits and less experience with implementing these kinds of apps.
I hope you didn't invest much time learning Java because it is going the way of the cuckoo. Java on the client side sucks - everyone knows it. Thats why no one deploys Java client applications anymore. Why didn't Google choose Java for maps.google.com? Why didnt Microsoft for Virtual Earth? Why didn't any major web app choose Java? Answer:
- Crappy non-native look and feel
- Slow start up (freezes the browser while Java initializes) and GUI responsiveness
- Large downloads required for computers that don't the right version of Java
Everyone should have a modern browser, even for security reasons. Not everyone should have the most recent JVM.
Sorry to contradict you, it does work with Opera on Mac OS X. And I've had reports it works on Windows too.
Anyway, what are you thinking when you launched this closed-source browser??
I agree it's hairy and heavy-weight, and that for most users it would be useless. But what about this: imagine a system where you choose which browser to render it in, and at what resolution. Web developers would LOVE this (an actual screenshot f their website in another environment, instantly).
I suppose that depends who you are talking to. I've generally seen AJAX used to describe any type of interactive web application that uses javascript to load data from the server asynchronously. If you want to use a strict definition, Google Maps isn't AJAX either, as it uses neither XML nor the XmlHttpRequest object.
Given that it is new APIs and new software, you can bet that it's going to cost the client more, given that there are fewer toolkits and less experience with implementing these kinds of apps.
My point was that (IMO) the name was coined because developers could develop the exact same solutions, but charge more for it by slapping a buzzwordy name on it (with a bonus for piggybacking off the buzzwordy-ness of XML, even though most 'AJAX' applications don't actually use XML). And it is most definitely not new technology. It's a new name for something that many people have been doing for years. I wrote my first 'AJAX' app in 2001, and I'm pretty sure there were others before me, even if I wasn't aware of it at the time.
P.S. The trademark comment was a joke. You know... Sarcasm. As many others have said, names are rarely unique. But just FYI, capitalization does enter into trademarking, together with font and color. The word spam is not trademarked, but if you put up a web site talking about junk mail, with the heading SPAM in bold yellow letters, you could probably expect to be hearing from Hormel's lawyers over it.
If I don't put anything here, will anyone recognize me anymore?
I should have posted an example instead of simply running off my mouth (fingers?).
e rence/objects/hta.asp
Open a text editor.
Enter the following, and save it in a file called gmail.hta (on your windows machine) You can then double click it. Note, you can also specify your own icons.
code:
<HTML>
<HEAD>
<TITLE>Google Mail</TITLE>
<HTA:APPLICATION ID="oGmail"
APPLICATIONNAME="Google Mail"
SINGLEINSTANCE="yes"
SCROLL="no"
>
</HEAD>
<BODY style="padding: 0 0 0 0; margin: 0 0 0 0">
<IFRAME style="height:100%;width:100%;border:none" src="http://gmail.com">
</IFRAME>
</BODY>
</HTML>
Go here for more info
http://msdn.microsoft.com/workshop/author/hta/ref
----- If communism is a system where the government owns business, what do you call a system where business owns govern
...there's already this. It does pretty much exactly what you're looking for, except via VNC.
The NeWS window system was "Ajaxian" back in the 90's, but it used PostScript instead of JavaScript, PostScript instead of HTML, and PostScript instead of XML. In other words, it was PostScript based, with a much more consistent architecture than AJAX, but it used the same essential techniques like downloadable code, local interaction, asynchronous network communication, etc.
Under the direction of Ben Shneiderman, we developed the HyperTIES hypermedia browser in NeWS, which downloaded PostScript programs and data into the NeWS window system, that implemented the HyperTIES user interface and rendered the interactive hypermedia content.
As well as supporting fully scalable PostScript graphics and text, you could also embed "applets" written in PostScript on the HyperTIES page, like pie menus, text and graphics editors, and other kinds of locally interactive user interfaces that communicate asynchronously with the HyperTIES engine and Emacs based authoring tool.
HyperTIES is described in the paper "Designing to Facilitate Browsing: A Look Back at the Hyperties Workstation Browser, by Ben Shneiderman, Catherine Plaisant, Rodrigo Botafogo, Don Hopkins, William Weiland.
-DonTake a look and feel free: http://www.PieMenu.com
I hope you didn't invest much time learning Java because it is going the way of the cuckoo.
Java is the most successful and widely used language in IT, and it's use is growing. You are confusing applets with Server side Java throughout your post. Saying 'Java is going the way of the cuckoo' is as dumb as saying 'the pentium is doomed' or 'no-one uses Windows'. (Actually, cuckoos are doing rather well - perhaps you meant Dodo?)
Java on the client side sucks - everyone knows it.
No. Just because you think that does not mean 'everyone knows it'. One of the most popular IDEs ever produced - Eclipse - is a client side Java app. Do you hear developers saying 'Eclipse sucks'? Of course not.
Thats why no one deploys Java client applications anymore.
Nonsense. You may be interested to know how widely used Java Web Start is - the answer is 'very widely'. Java Web Start is a technology for deploying client side apps.
Why didn't Google choose Java for maps.google.com?
Because they need a distributed API that doesn't need a download. Google use huge amounts of Java for other things on their servers.
Why didnt Microsoft for Virtual Earth?
Because Microsoft dropped use of cross-platform Java years ago!
Why didn't any major web app choose Java?
Most of them DO use Java, but on the server side.
For example, e-bay runs almost entirely on Java.
Answer:
- Crappy non-native look and feel
What non-native look and feel? Most applets use the native GUI!
- Slow start up (freezes the browser while Java initializes) and GUI responsiveness
When does this happen? Modern VMs can start up in a fraction of a second. What lack of responsiveness - it uses the native GUI!
- Large downloads required for computers that don't the right version of Java
Wrong. A moderate once-only download (not downloads).
Funny how Slashdotters are so keen for users to download tens of megabytes in order to switch browsers objects so strongly to a much smaller download to keep the JVM up to date!
Is there something about the word 'Java' that blocks intelligent thought processes? Why do I see so many posts which talk about Java as it was nearly a decade ago? I thought nerds were supposed to be up-to-date with IT developments.
I am developing a custom app for a top-three pharmaceutical company and they were very pleased to learn that we can deploy using Java Web Start. Its all Swing btw.
I was amazed to hear that there is an Applet API for DOM interaction. Is there any work to make this cross browser compatible? I develop web applications for Higher Ed and I am constantly battling the limitations of ADA compliance in making fun interactive web pages. I can see how something like this could make an excellent "Web 2.0" ish version that didn't rely on redoing every page in Java Script (thus creating a nightmare of code to support) It seems like you could build some extremely powerful web apps that went far beyond the capabilities of Java Script and used better persistence patterns and stood a much better chance of being cross browser compatible. This is defiantly worth investigating.
-Jason
You can't assume browsers have turned on JavaScript either
It's a safer assumption.
"AJAX takes off because it can reach over 90% of users, and especially the mainstream ones."
It doesn't. It reaches only the users with browsers which support the latest JavaScript.
Which probably is somewhere near, oh, 90% of users.
I agree with your comments however It must not load with the awful gray square or gratuitous Sun/Java logos. is not such a great point. Go to maps.google.com (one of your examples no less) and although it loads quite quickly, there clearly is an awful grey square prior to the map tiles being d/led.
Visualize Whirled Peas
It cleans the fridge, table, oven, microwave, and floor... but not the kitchen sink.;)
Is this a sigs-optional kind of place? 'Cause I am totally down with that if you know what I mean.
JOB TITLE: AJAX Innovator
LOCATION: Mountain View, CA
DESCRIPTION:
Want to transform the world of search? We are seeking a highly-motivated software developer to lead web applications development. The ideal candidate is an enthusiastic and entrepreneurial software engineer with startup experience who feels passionately about making software highly usable. You would feel right at home with us if you believe creating great web applications requires "getting into the mind and heart of the user".
Headquartered in Mountain View, we are privately held and VC-backed.
REQUIRED TECHNICAL EXPERIENCE:
* Java Servlet/JSP or equivalent
* Web application experience (HTML, AJAX, DHTML, JavaScript, JSP)
* Relational database experience (MySQL, Oracle, SQL Server, Postgres SQL, DB2)
* Persistence layer experience (e.g. Hibernate)
* Human Computer Interaction (HCI)
* Full product lifecycle
* Natural Language Processing (NLP) and/or Search experience a plus
QUALIFICATIONS:
* BS or higher in Computer Science
* 3-5 years of software engineering experience
* Outstanding communication and teamwork skills
* Passion for broad areas of science, technology, and innovation
* Startup experience
* High degree of integrity, passion and drive
Send resume and cover letter to jobs@darthdex.com with subject line "AJAX Innovator". US work authorization required.
KEYWORDS:
o Search Engine / Search Engines
o Internet Search
o Web Applications Engineer
o Software Developer
o User Interface
o Human Computer Interaction (HCI)
Yes just displaced that title from COBOL congratulations, but real software isnt developed in languages used by IT, not operating systems, not webservers, not rdbms, not compilers, not even webbrowsers nothing important in the grand scheme of things
There is a high-performance Java webserver - tomcat 5.5 does this and even matches Apache in some benchmarks.
There is a high-performance Java database - HSQLDB.
And, of course, the Java compiler itself is written in Java.
There are also real-time high-performance device control systems, games, mobile devices, interpreters for other languages - you name it, it has been written in Java.
I will use an IDE compiled to native instructions that dosent grind my machine to a halt, thank you very much.
I really don't understand how such a lack of knowledge of Java persists on these forums. Java IS compiled to native instructions, and has been for about 7 years!
This oft repeated misnomer is tiresome, wow java preforms well on servers that cost north of 40k thats great, If I hade serveral GB of RAM and multiple processors maybe I too wouldnt notice a difference between java and native compiled code, oh wait I do, and the performance of java is still blows.
Perhaps you should actually take a look at the e-Bay infrastructure before you comment? Those specs are, of course, nonsense.
Java is irrelevant too real programmers, a terrible "platform" in its own right, and even worse language but I dont fell like ranting about that right this instant.
A strange statement, as about three quarters of 'real' programmers use Java. Unless you are simply labelling anyone who uses Java as not a real programmer.
Write once run anywhere in the context of java is utter and complete bullshit otherwise I wouldnt need to have two versions of the jdk installed on my machine....
Right. So no-one is ever going to be allowed to add features to Java because you are insisting that 'write once run anywhere' means that you want to only have, say Java 1.1.8 installed?
And when your internet connection goes south, or your network connection is broken, you can't get to your stuff. Oh, you have back-up apps on the HD. What? To save money, you bought a dumb box?
This sounds like the Microsoft version of the perfect future in which all applications are on line, you pay monthly fees to subscribe to them, and Microsoft is running the internet for peace, security, and benefit of all humankind. Bill Gates, looking like Henry Gibson on Laugh-In, is smiling at you out of the screen and has a flower for you.
I think I'll stay behind the wave on this one.
"You can't assume browsers have turned on JavaScript either"
It's a safer assumption.
Not really. A good developer should assume that neither Java or JavaScript are present.
"AJAX takes off because it can reach over 90% of users, and especially the mainstream ones."
"It doesn't. It reaches only the users with browsers which support the latest JavaScript."
Which probably is somewhere near, oh, 90% of users.
I think you should do a bit of research before posting. Try Google Maps on even moderately old browsers and you will see it complain. Here is the compatibility note:
"Google Maps is not compatible with every web browser. Google Maps currently supports recent versions of Firefox/Mozilla, IE 5.5+, Safari 1.2+, and sort of supports Opera. IE 5.0 is not supported"
If you had experience of writing a large commercial website you would realise that that does not mean 90% of all users - not even somewhere near!
However, suppose it was 90%, or even 95%.... on a large website with thousands of users per day, that means you are rejecting a substantial number of people.
I like the idea of AJAX for many purposes - it seems particularly good for internal company use where you can guarantee browser versions, or for stuff like 'google maps' which is a fun or convenience thing. However, anyone who uses it for essential stuff on sites where you can't guarantee the browser type is going to make a lot of users very annoyed.
However, anyone who uses it for essential stuff on sites where you can't guarantee the browser type is going to make a lot of users very annoyed.
Essentially, if Google, 37signals, etc. are fine with requiring a modern browser, so am I.
Essentially, if Google, 37signals, etc. are fine with requiring a modern browser, so am I.
Fine. Good luck to you. But if you are writing a website that has to support hundreds of thousands of users and your customer base ranges from young nerds with the latest Firefox to late-middle aged who are still using IE4/5 on Win98, then modern AJAX (as against lots of old JavaScript hacks) just won't do the job.
This is why I responded in the negative to the statement that AJAX is OK for 90% of users. It isn't. Really.
Well, maps.google.com gives me a blank page... not too encouraging for Ajax. OTOH, maps24.com gives me a nice zoomable, draggable map interface in java for the US, Canada, and much of Europe.
In my experiance, these javascript based apps are much more likely to not work, where all the java applets "just work" whether I'm using IE, Opera or Netscape.
Opera, Proxomitron-Grypen,GPG 0x0A1C6EE3
But if you are writing a website that has to support hundreds of thousands of users and your customer base ranges from young nerds with the latest Firefox to late-middle aged
. php
And Google doesn't qualify for that market... how, exactly?
This is why I responded in the negative to the statement that AJAX is OK for 90% of users. It isn't. Really.
While browser stats are a bit of voodoo science, TheCounter.com publishes theirs (and their counters are used on a hell of a lot of sites, so it should be a pretty good representative sample).
http://www.thecounter.com/stats/2005/July/browser
From that, AJAX is supported by 90-95% of their visitors. If you have stats that say otherwise, by all means present them.
"But if you are writing a website that has to support hundreds of thousands of users and your customer base ranges from young nerds with the latest Firefox to late-middle aged"
And Google doesn't qualify for that market... how, exactly?
We aren't talking about Google. We are talking about Google Maps. Big difference.
From that, AJAX is supported by 90-95% of their visitors. If you have stats that say
otherwise, by all means present them.
Visitors is not the same as users, as a minority of people make up the majority of internet use. You have to consider your target audience. here may be a lot of users out there who occasionally use the internet, and have legacy browsers (I know this to be the case, because if I don't allow backward compatibility, I get a lot of complaints!).
Even if you only reject say 5% of users, you are putting off a large number of potential customers. That is bad news for many business sites.
We aren't talking about Google. We are talking about Google Maps. Big difference.
I'd be very surprised if Google Maps hadn't had hundreds of thousands of users ranging from nerds with Firefox to the elderly.
I know this to be the case, because if I don't allow backward compatibility, I get a lot of complaints!
A site with AJAX can be constructed in a manner that is backwards compatible, too. The AJAX helpers in Ruby on Rails, for example, make it straightforward.
Even if you only reject say 5% of users, you are putting off a large number of potential customers.
Depends on how much advantage you can give to the other 95% of users.
Take Gmail, for example. Most everyone I've talked to about it vastly prefers it over the old, static Hotmail / Yahoo! Mail / etc. Faster, easier to use, better features for 95% of browsers trumps the 5% who can't use it (or need the standard HTML version) handily.
Java IS compiled to native instructions, and has been for about 7 years!
. htm
You understand what the original poster is saying of course. Java is compiled to bytecode. The bytecode is only compiled to native instructions at runtime. This will always be a significant performance hit. gcj rules of course, but nobody uses it yet.
Perhaps you should actually take a look at the e-Bay infrastructure before you comment? Those specs are, of course, nonsense.
You're wrong.
http://www.internetweek.com/newslead01/lead011101
Note, in particular, "EBay uses Sun Enterprise Servers in tightly integrated clusters..." Ebay does run Java on big iron.
A strange statement, as about three quarters of 'real' programmers use Java.
That's an even stranger statement! Are you really claiming that, of all programmers in the world, 1 in 3 actively use Java?? That's simply wrong. You'll have to back that assertion up.
Right. So no-one is ever going to be allowed to add features to Java because you are insisting that 'write once run anywhere' means that you want to only have, say Java 1.1.8 installed?
Yes, absolutely. Write once, run ANYWHERE. That's what "anywhere" means.
I'll put it another way. How many times have you had to upgrade your PC physical machine because a new version of GCC came out? Since 1987, maybe twice. Yet today I'm forced to download two separate virtual machines (1.3.1, and 1.4.2) to install the full Oracle suite. Even you must admit that this indicates a pretty serious problem.
I'd be very surprised if Google Maps hadn't had hundreds of thousands of users ranging from nerds with Firefox to the elderly.
I'm sure they do, but this is yet again missing the point. There are hundreds of thousands of users who can't use Google Maps because of their browsers.
A site with AJAX can be constructed in a manner that is backwards compatible, too. The AJAX helpers in Ruby on Rails, for example, make it straightforward.
No it can't. There are significant JavaScript compatibility problems with older browsers that made JavaScript development for these a problem. The way that they handled the DOM was quote different, and support for XMLHttpRequest wasn't there.
And don't get me started on the mess that is Ruby on Rails.
Depends on how much advantage you can give to the other 95% of users.
No it doesn't. Suppose you are a large company with a long established customer base. You don't install a technology that immediately cuts off features from 5% of your users. It is very bad business practice.
"Java IS compiled to native instructions, and has been for about 7 years!"
. htm
You understand what the original poster is saying of course. Java is compiled to bytecode. The bytecode is only compiled to native instructions at runtime. This will always be a significant performance hit. gcj rules of course, but nobody uses it yet.
Nonsense. This shows a fundamental misunderstanding of how Hotspot works. Compilation to native code is done in the background. There is no performance hit, which is why Java can now be used successfully for things like real-time control.
You're wrong.
http://www.internetweek.com/newslead01/lead011101
Note, in particular, "EBay uses Sun Enterprise Servers in tightly integrated clusters..." Ebay does run Java on big iron.
You need to update your facts. That was from years ago. EBay has been migrating off of such so-called 'big iron' to Linux.
"Right. So no-one is ever going to be allowed to add features to Java because you are insisting that 'write once run anywhere' means that you want to only have, say Java 1.1.8 installed?"
Yes, absolutely. Write once, run ANYWHERE. That's what "anywhere" means.
No it absolutely is not. This has to be the silliest definition I have ever heard.
I'll put it another way. How many times have you had to upgrade your PC physical machine because a new version of GCC came out? Since 1987, maybe twice.
That is a very poor analogy. The appropriate question is 'how many times have you had to upgrade your libc to run newer software since Linux was released'. The answer is many times. Does that mean that Linux is not a portable platform? Of course not! It just means that the libraries get updated on all platforms.
Yet today I'm forced to download two separate virtual machines (1.3.1, and 1.4.2) to install the full Oracle suite. Even you must admit that this indicates a pretty serious problem.
Of course it isn't serious - and exaggerating for effect like this does not help your point. Just because Oracle embed different versions of Java does not mean that other companies don't write very successful portable Java apps. A good example is NetBeans which not only runs on a range of platforms, it even runs on VMs which aren't Sun's (like IBMs) and VMs that aren't even based on Sun's code (HPs). This is as it should be.
That's an even stranger statement! Are you really claiming that, of all programmers in the world, 1 in 3 actively use Java?? That's simply wrong. You'll have to back that assertion up.
It is not simply wrong - it is a simple fact. It is backed by the job market, surveys of developers, surveys of managers, book sales, the TIOBE index, download statistics for development tools.
You may not like it, but the development world today for most people is a Java world.
I was amazed to hear that there is an Applet API for DOM interaction. Is there any work to make this cross browser compatible?
It already is! There was an API that was introduced for Netscape, but it was extended by Sun to allow JavaScript and DOM interaction for all modern browsers (although there are some differences). It is called LiveConnect, and provides netscape.* packages for applets.
Java Applet technology has changed beyond recognition in the past few years - I find the idea of Java Applet interaction with JavaScript and AJAX to be very exciting and powerful.
I can see how something like this could make an excellent "Web 2.0" ish version that didn't rely on redoing every page in Java Script (thus creating a nightmare of code to support) It seems like you could build some extremely powerful web apps that went far beyond the capabilities of Java Script and used better persistence patterns and stood a much better chance of being cross browser compatible. This is defiantly worth investigating.
My view exactly!
What is all this talk about "server-push"?
;)... except to say:
.net or whatever.
:).
It is still HTTP underneath... everything is still client-driven... or am i missing something? Yes, the client can poll the server for updates... is that what people mean by push?
Ho-hum, i've missed the boat on this thread and would love to discuss ajax, but i'm afraid my comments will just get buried in yesterday's news so i'm not going to waste my time
I like ajax. In my app it is a really nice and efficient way to do in-page tree expansions, retrieve forms/dialogs, and to send complex validations and evaluations of user-entered data in order to tailor (especially where multiple form fields have dependency links).
What i don't like: i am the proud owner of many thousands of lines of javascript renderers (the whole ui (menus, trees, dialogs, etc) are all rendered from xml in js. Now that ajax is finally catching on, i expect we'll see more and more standard rendering components. Before long, they'll be built in to the browsers. Cross-browser js is painful.
An intersting discussion: why now? Ajax has been around for 5 yrs, why is it suddenly gettin buzz? My app went this route with IE5.0 and a couple years ago, we felt we'd misread the crystal ball by going with this approach. Sure, it was working well, but it had no buzz. The IT deps of our customers didn't understand the model and we'd have to explain it over and over and they's always want to know why we weren't more buzz-word compliant with j2ee or
The good news: i finally have a marketable skill to put on my resume
cheers!
stu.
Yeah, "server-push" was a misstatement caused by too quick posting. Proof reading isn't for /. posts. In the end, polling can be quite efficient ("anything new"->"nope") in terms of bandwidth and server resources and in effect is updates from the server as needed (the collaborative word processor shown recently makes it good use of such techniques). The old "content push" clients were nothing more than this (since actually pushing to firewalled or NATted clients is nearly impossible).
But in the end, my enthusiasm is from the idea of central management and zero client side impact as compared to the heavier apps that used to be the norm for this level of interactivity. Since our product is already web based, our (personal) main gains are in reducing the server load by doing micro updates on demand instead of brute force page rebuilds.
I think the main reason for "why now" is that the browser market has stabilized around two platforms that are reliable enough to pull it off. Back when you had to support 4.0 versions of browsers it just wasn't going to happen.
On the subject of the browsers adding support for ajax, I'm not really sure that's going to be a great thing. Ajax snuck up on people because Javascript, CSS and XHTML were standard *enough* to make it work... any extensions by the vendors will probably be completely incompatible.
Sig under construction since 1998.