Slashdot Mirror
Google Releases AJAX Framework
maquina writes "Google released a new AJAX framework based on Java. From Google's mouth: "Google Web Toolkit (GWT) is a Java software development framework that makes writing AJAX applications like Google Maps and Gmail easy for developers who don't speak browser quirks as a second language." This impressive framework promises to make AJAX available to the masses and is one more step towards Google becoming the de facto Internet platform provider."
No, they haven't - at least not unless you have some other information you're not sharing.
From the Google site:
From the Yahoo link you provided:
So, how is this the same thing?
Nope, there's a big difference between these libraries.
:)
The Y! framework still requires you to write HTML and Javascript - they just make implementing DHTML effects + AJAX less painful.
The Google framework removes the base need for HTML and Javascript authoring from the application development process entirely. Obviously you'll want to make the app look nice and need custom styling but in order to actually develop the functionality, zero HTML is needed.
As a consequence you can use the Yahoo stuff with any backend implementation language (PHP, Java, whatever) while the Google framework is limited to strictly Java. I don't mind though.
"Although it is not true that all conservatives are stupid, it is true that most stupid people are conservative."
It's not quite a "brand new direction" - Microsoft's Atlas product has been offering something along these lines for a while now (albeit still as a beta). You lay out controls visually in Visual Studio (or Express), and control them programmatically from .NET. It takes care of rendering them down to HTML + Javascript, and it's pretty much cross platform friendly.
Prohibited Actions
Except for distributions for internal business and/or personal use to your employees or contractors in compliance with these Terms and Conditions, you may not distribute Google Web Toolkit Development Tools or any services or software associated with or derived from them, or modify, copy, license, or create derivative works from Google Web Toolkit Development Tools, unless you obtain Google's written permission in advance. If you wish to do any of the above, please contact us by emailing apis@google.com. You may not use the Google Web Toolkit Development Tools to develop or distribute products that violate the law or legal rights of third parties.
No, I'm not looking a gift horse in the mouth and why does this matter? Because I happen to prefer PHP for web development (just a personal preference). It would be nice to be able to move the JavaScript components off from the Java framework into a PHP based framework. Well, apparantly you can't do that without special permission.
BTW, the Yahoo UI Library is BSD licensed.
Ohhh? Was it overlooked?
To be fair, Yahoo's is just a collection of controls and widgets to be included in a project indvidually - which has been offered by many other sites for quite a while now - while Google's promises to be a framework that takes the headache out of front-end AJAX development. Of course, in my experience "automatically generates code" and "takes the headache out of" are eventually incompatible down the line, but what do I know.
I haven't played with either yet, but they sound like two different beasts to me. The most interesting part of this to me would be to see how Google writes their web code.
ClutterMe.com - easiest site creation on the Net. Just click and type.
"I think Google is mostly responsible for launching the AJAX trend"
Er, nope. Hard as it is to believe, Microsoft were there first with the awesome Outlook Web Access which mimics Outlook, on a web page really, really well. This used their XMLHTTP ActiveX object which is also used extensively in Windows Update.
The rest happened from there really. Google is probably the best known current implementer of AJAX, but good as they are I certainly wouldn't say they launched it... and I certainly wish world + dog would stop releasing AJAX frameworks!
The oft-copied 'google suggest' dropdown stuff. It's not something demoed in the 'kitchensink' app they provide at http://code.google.com/webtoolkit/documentation/ex amples/kitchensink/.
.net can use atlas for most of these features, people using Ruby or other scripting langauges probably have bindings to scriptaculous and other libraries to handle most of this. There were/are probably Java bindings already for scriptaculous, but this makes it easier for java people already used to swing/awt stuff.
:)
I agree with someone else that the Yahoo UI (yui) toolkit seems to get ignored a bit, but I think this plays to a different crowd.
1) This is a java-based thing only it seems. People writing
2) The YUI stuff was more javascript oriented, and, from my experience, difficult to use in some settings. I had a hard time getting the slider stuff to work as needed based solely on their code and one example page, for example. Perhaps that makes me not as l33t as some others who can debug others' javascript in their sleep - I dunno. I do know that if Google makes this easy for people to adopt, it'll take off. Partially because there's a lot of google love amongst early-adopters in the tech community, and partially because making things easy is just a good way to attract people.
3) With the YUI stuff, Yahoo was/is seeming to cater to the scripting crowd more (witness the native serialized PHP responses you can get back). If google is going after the "I write Java apps" crowd, they may be able to bring in a new set of people to web-app development who before now were not in the web space.
I interviewed one of the Yahoo engineers who worked on the YUI widgets release at my podcast - http://webdevradio.com - you can get some more perspective on what Yahoo was/is doing and trying to achieve with that move.
Just some random thoughts...
creation science book
Sorry, but I have to give it to someone other than Microsoft. While they did essentially invent the tech behind Ajax, the only major project they used it on was basically something that was closed. I don't mean source, but not open to the public. You only saw it if you had an organization using Outlook/Exchange in the first place, which still excluded a huge majority of people using the web. Had they ported hotmail to the OWA interface, that would have been a major revolution far greater than google maps or anything else. But they didn't.
creation science book
.NET and AJAX really don't play nicely.
Have you seen ICallbackEventHandler in ASP.NET 2 and MS's own ATLAS toolkit?
The browser vendors consider this "a really good thing" because it offers "product differentiation" and "market segment focus". The cost in human lives is not an issue.
The Russians have won. They have made the world a cesspool of distrust, greed, fear and hate.
The w3c validator is fine, to my understanding this is valid html
http://virtuelvis.com/archives/2004/02/evilml
"In a time of universal deceit - telling the truth is a revolutionary act." - George Orwell
Yes, it is. It just uses HTML syntax that virtually no browsers have implemented. This is what the HTML 4.01 specification has to say on the matter:
Bogtha Bogtha Bogtha
It's not "beta" like this half-baked "me-too" from google, and it's open-source.Also commercial support is available it you want to pay for it.
More like .NET isn't ready for AJAX. AJAX doesn't really use any new web technologies, it just applies existing ones in a somewhat new way. ASP.NET OTOH is a framework that tries to completely shield the developer from the underlying web technologies, and it does so with varying degrees of success, in the process turning out web technology idiots.
Search Slashdot for ATLAS (and make sure to copy over all of the negative posts about why people don't want this).
.NET GUI objects to render browser-compliant javascript and HTML.
Atlas is the AJAX framework built by Microsoft that allows you to use
It is a much more proper predecessor to Google's release, compared with Yahoo!'s offering (which I believe MS also predated).
To be fair I think the progression to AJAX was an evolution of which the last breaking point was web service and the ability to easily (I use that term lightly) transmit simple objects across the wire. When MS built their web outlook they where passing raw XML back and forth across the wire, with all the nastiness that comes along with it. With the push towards web services, and the XmlHttpRequest laying in obscurity it was only natural that it someone would (re)figure out the coupling of these technologies to become AJAX for more info on who contributed what look here
And here I was all ready to take off my tinfoil hat.
Beg to differ. JavaScript has just as much "modularity" as any other object-oriented language; methods like JSON and libraries like Dojo, Prototype, and the aforementioned Yahoo! Web Services APIs are proof.
Every few years there comes along Yet Another Initiative to fire all the webdevs. No disrepect to Google's engineers, who are clearly brilliant, but we've been there and done that. For a good time, open up Firefox's DOM Inspector, crack into their Kitchen Sink demo, and boggle over the iframes and tables and embedded JavaScript, oh my!
I haven't heard anyone comment about what I think is a great feature in this toolkit:
I know this is something you can hack together if you're writing your own hand-crafted js, but this will be a nice feature -- I haven't looked at the toolkit yet, but I wonder how easy to use this will be.
Have any of the other frameworks provided this mechanism?
We use Java, C++, Python and a smattering of other languages for user facing stuff.
Chris
Co-Editor, Open Sources
Open Source Program Manager, Google, Inc.
Coding your UI in java and having it translated into javascript and html without having to worry about cross browser compatibility?
Sounds familiar. It's rather like the echo framework
The big differences I see are:
1) Google toolkit advantages:
- No load on the server to render the UI. All ui code runs on the browser, so this may help server scalability.
2) Echo advantages:
- Fully open source.
- Richer set of ui components (IMO - see the demo at http://demo.nextapp.com/Demo/app )
-- MartinG To mail me: echo kewyjlcxyzvjfxbqwh | tr bcefhjklqvwxyz
>> Doesn't AJAX mean 'Async. Java And XML'? So can you have AJAX based on something else?
Javascript not Java, so yes, you can have AJAX based on something else.
AJAX = "Asynchronous JavaScript and XML"
so yes, you can have it based on something else. Java != Javascript
|---------------|
practically an AC
I'm suprised no one, especially Sun, have tried it earlier.
They did (along with lots of other OSS toolkits - get googling)
Actually, GWT works with all server technologies (PHP, ASP, Java, etc). GWT is primarily a client-side technology that is deployed as HTML and JavaScript that can be served by any web server. If you want to do RPCs from GWT to a non-Java server, that is easy too; check out our JSON RPC example here: http://code.google.com/webtoolkit/documentation/ex amples/jsonrpc/. We created this example to demonstrate this exact use case.
Bret Taylor
Product Manager, Google Web Toolkit
Besides XMLHttpRequest, there is a way to transfer data between Java and Javascript. An embedded Java applet can communicate with the server which passes values to Javascript. I was using this technique back in ~ 1997 to populate a select box based on input from an input box. I'm in a rush so can't track references to this down, but it should be considered in this history - the AJAX concept has been around for a while. Anyway, I'm only mentioning this because many people don't know about it and the original article is about Java. :)
I take it you don't know about Direct Web Remoting?
http://getahead.ltd.uk/dwr/
You can disable the checking for updates either as an option in about:config or as an actual compile-time option.
'Yes, firefox is indeed greater than women. Can women block pops up for you? No. Can Firefox show you naked women? Yes.'