On Fri, October 14, 2005 2:44 am, Michael Jouravlev said: > On 10/13/05, Frank W. Zammetti <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> It's not going to kill Flash because, when used properly, Flash is >> fantastic and different from anything else out there. Just as a silly >> example: how am I going to a StrongBad eMail in Ajax? A lot of people >> hate Flash, but I think that comes from people misusing it... > > Well, maybe. But it is slow, slow, slow. And, I already have windowing > system in my OS, why do I need another one? I thought that with > webapps now I don't have to move windows over screen and click on tiny > [x] buttons. Avalon - that is the real thing. Flash is just something > to fill the void before Avalon kicks in ;-)
I think when you say it's slow that comes more from people misusing it. People who try to do entire sites in Flash are, IMO, misusing it. Flash is a very nice vector rendering/scripting system. As such, it has some very appropriate uses, and I can't imagine anyone would say it is slow in those cases. Unless you really mean slow to load, which is a completely fair criticism. If someone tries to use it as a windowing system, then I would say that's another misuse and I would agree completely with your criticism. >> you can't do an RIA without client-side scripting (at least, I can't see >> how you could). Be that as it may, those that still cling to that old >> mentality won't be touching Ajax. > > Some nice scripting without Ajax, just Javascript and CSS: > http://www.themaninblue.com/writing/perspective/2005/10/05/form/form4.htm > I wish Struts Validator could be that cool :-) Pretty straight-forward stuff. This is the kind of thing I'm talking about though... some people have an aversion to client-side scripting entirely, and wouldn't implement a form like that. To me though, if I hit submit and have to wait for the server to validate that form and re-render the page, I wouldn't like it. That's the "classic" web paradigm, and the paradigm who's time I belive has passed. I don't think people will stand for that sort of thing very much longer. Does that mean that form has to be validated with Ajax calls instead of the client-side validation? No, I'm not saying that, although you can make some very reasonable arguments that in fact that's how it should work. I don't go that far usually. That form, to me, illustrates how things *should* be done. I should NOT have to contact the server to tell me I didn't fill in a required field, and by contacting the server I include Ajax in that. Now, if part of the validation of that form is ensuring the zip code I entered is a valid one, I *would* expect the server to have to get involved. No sense downloading every possible zip code to the client so I can do it client-side. > Please, don't throw out the baby with the bath water. I still think > that idea of hyperlinked documents is a nice one. The possibility to > print any page is nice. The possibility to change font size, colors, > style and even formatting is nice. Zero footprint and installation is > nice. Web apps are not a step backward to character terminals, they > are... a sidestep, if you will. I don't want to go back to windowed > apps like Swing over JNLP, I had my share of Borland C++, MCVC 4 and > 5, Delphi and even PowerBuilder. > > I mean, both types of apps have pros and cons, and I believe that > "traditional" web app will survive. I don't disagree with that at all. It is important to make the distinction between a web "site" and a web "app". They usually have rather different goals. That aside, when your talking about delivering content rather than an interactive application, there's very little reason in my mind to change what we're doing today. What I mean is, think of cnn.com, and then think of a CRM application. They are clearly two different things. CNN isn't neccessarily limited by the "classic" web paradigm, whereas the CRM app very possibly is. So no, I don't propose throwing out the baby with the bathwater as you say :) Perhaps just changing the water for the rest of the family! :) > Michael. Frank --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
