Comments on: A million dollar question: which RIA technology do we recommend? http://molecularvoices.molecular.com/2008/a-million-dollar-question-which-ria-technology-do-we-recommend/ where conversation and digital minds meet Wed, 07 Jan 2009 11:12:29 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6.5 By: Glenn Barnett http://molecularvoices.molecular.com/2008/a-million-dollar-question-which-ria-technology-do-we-recommend/#comment-200 Glenn Barnett Mon, 24 Mar 2008 12:56:32 +0000 http://molecularvoices.molecular.com/2008/a-million-dollar-question-which-ria-technology-do-we-recommend/#comment-200 I think that a truly modern and optimized consumer-facing website MUST use both technologies. At this point, the question shifts from WHICH to use to HOW to use them. People must be able to see through the zealotry that various constituents bring to the table, and look objectively for proven concepts and examples that deliver on a rich, polished, immediate, scalable, extensible, spiderable experience. I think that a truly modern and optimized consumer-facing website MUST use both technologies.

At this point, the question shifts from WHICH to use to HOW to use them.

People must be able to see through the zealotry that various constituents bring to the table, and look objectively for proven concepts and examples that deliver on a rich, polished, immediate, scalable, extensible, spiderable experience.

]]> By: Paul Irish http://molecularvoices.molecular.com/2008/a-million-dollar-question-which-ria-technology-do-we-recommend/#comment-199 Paul Irish Sun, 23 Mar 2008 17:31:32 +0000 http://molecularvoices.molecular.com/2008/a-million-dollar-question-which-ria-technology-do-we-recommend/#comment-199 Over at <a href="http://www.insideria.com/2008/03/the-view-source-dilema.html" rel="nofollow">InsideRIA, Tony MacDonell discusses "view-source"</a>, how it has enabled amateur developers in JavaScript, yet keeps a higher degree of exclusivity to the techniques of Flash and Flex developers. Interesting thoughts. Over at InsideRIA, Tony MacDonell discusses “view-source”, how it has enabled amateur developers in JavaScript, yet keeps a higher degree of exclusivity to the techniques of Flash and Flex developers.

Interesting thoughts.

]]> By: Craig Andrews http://molecularvoices.molecular.com/2008/a-million-dollar-question-which-ria-technology-do-we-recommend/#comment-198 Craig Andrews Fri, 21 Mar 2008 21:42:27 +0000 http://molecularvoices.molecular.com/2008/a-million-dollar-question-which-ria-technology-do-we-recommend/#comment-198 One thing not considered here is the topic of freedom and future availability. To see what I'm talking about, consider a future where Flash becomes prevalent, and AJAX all but dies. The first major difference is that no one can take apart a Flash app and figure out how it works. This will be especially painful for Molecular, as we all learn by seeing what's cool out there, figuring out what "makes it tick," then applying those ideas and technologies on our own projects. If we can no longer do that, it really kills our ability to move forward. The second major difference is in the development of new talent, or lack thereof. If Flash, Silverlight, or any of the other proprietary technologies win, the ability for people to learn will be greatly hindered. Flash's development environment costs a lot of money - money that students, for instance, do not have. So they simply won't learn it, and therefore, they won't join the industry, and our rate of innovation slows to more or less a grinding halt. Third, our ability to interoperate with systems is drastically hindered. Right now, if we want to extend GMail, we can do that - with a quick greasemonkey script and a few hours, a developer can accomplish a lot. We can also "screen scrape" an open standards site (aka html), and syndicate that data wherever we want, or just study it. These are things you cannot do with Flash and other proprietary technologies - unless the creator explicitly allows you to do so. Would we have RSS today if we didn't have screen scraping yesterday? What else would we miss out on in such future? Fourth, the development of the technology is left to one vendor, making a monopoly. For example of this, consider what happened with Internet Explorer after Microsoft won the Netscape/IE browser war. IE stagnated for years. If Flash, or Silverlight, or some other proprietary technology wins, then it's vendor no longer has a reason to develop. In fact, it has incentive *not* to develop - less resources spent on development means more money for the investors. In the case of open standards, the industry leaders (like Molecular) will always be pushing the envelope, and paying people to make runtimes (like Firefox) better, or working together in standards organizations (like ISO, ECMA, or W3C). We need to not only consider what is good for our clients *now*, but also what is good for our clients and ourselves in the future. Molecular, and many other companies, could not operate in a proprietary world... and I think we need to keep that in mind what we talk about the "advantages" Flash has over AJAX. One thing not considered here is the topic of freedom and future availability. To see what I’m talking about, consider a future where Flash becomes prevalent, and AJAX all but dies.
The first major difference is that no one can take apart a Flash app and figure out how it works. This will be especially painful for Molecular, as we all learn by seeing what’s cool out there, figuring out what “makes it tick,” then applying those ideas and technologies on our own projects. If we can no longer do that, it really kills our ability to move forward.
The second major difference is in the development of new talent, or lack thereof. If Flash, Silverlight, or any of the other proprietary technologies win, the ability for people to learn will be greatly hindered. Flash’s development environment costs a lot of money - money that students, for instance, do not have. So they simply won’t learn it, and therefore, they won’t join the industry, and our rate of innovation slows to more or less a grinding halt.
Third, our ability to interoperate with systems is drastically hindered. Right now, if we want to extend GMail, we can do that - with a quick greasemonkey script and a few hours, a developer can accomplish a lot. We can also “screen scrape” an open standards site (aka html), and syndicate that data wherever we want, or just study it. These are things you cannot do with Flash and other proprietary technologies - unless the creator explicitly allows you to do so. Would we have RSS today if we didn’t have screen scraping yesterday? What else would we miss out on in such future?
Fourth, the development of the technology is left to one vendor, making a monopoly. For example of this, consider what happened with Internet Explorer after Microsoft won the Netscape/IE browser war. IE stagnated for years. If Flash, or Silverlight, or some other proprietary technology wins, then it’s vendor no longer has a reason to develop. In fact, it has incentive *not* to develop - less resources spent on development means more money for the investors. In the case of open standards, the industry leaders (like Molecular) will always be pushing the envelope, and paying people to make runtimes (like Firefox) better, or working together in standards organizations (like ISO, ECMA, or W3C).
We need to not only consider what is good for our clients *now*, but also what is good for our clients and ourselves in the future. Molecular, and many other companies, could not operate in a proprietary world… and I think we need to keep that in mind what we talk about the “advantages” Flash has over AJAX. ]]>