Rev vs. AJAX...Or Web-Aware Apps vs. Web Apps

[xbury.cs at clearstream.com]

Chipp, 

I agree but it's still a good idea to be able to play with apps the way 
CMS or ajax or web based plugins do!

If this kind of power is built in your stacks, in the long run, you're the 
clear winner - assuming 
you get the same amount of features + the flex of Rev... At least that's 
how i experience it across my work
at home and my scripting's result at work... Both are interchangeble, work 
on any data types and the
GUIs are just there wherever i go... 

And i proudly cover any of the points Dan mentioned!

cheers
Xavier 


use-revolution-bounces at lists.runrev.com wrote on 14/10/2005 08:24:09:

> Dan Shafer wrote:
> 
> > Now, lest you conclude that I'm ready to chuck Rev in favor of Laszlo 
> > or AJAX, let me assure you that isn't in the cards, at least not yet. 
> > Because standalone apps still have some big advantages and of course 
> > Rev adds to those with its rapid development capability for cross- 
> > platform software. Standalone apps are still:
> > 
> > * generally faster than Web apps
> > * not dependent upon a reasonably fast Internet connection
> > * not dependent on a server "out there somewhere" being up and running 

> > and not overloaded
> > * better looking with better user experiences (at least potentially)
> > * easier to protect against unauthorized use
> > * able to read and write data to and from the user's local drive 
(which 
> > neither Laszlo nor AJAX can do, being confined in a security  sandbox)
> 
> Dan and I have been going around on this for awhile now privately. 
> Frankly, I'm not a real big AJAX fan. In fact, I think it's not much 
> more than the current flavor of the month.
> 
> A couple more bullet points to add to your list:
> 
> 1) How many companies would seriously consider using AJAX (or Rev for 
> that matter) for a large-scale revenue producing project? Not startups, 
> mind you, but companies who really need apps that perform...like Adobe.
> 
> 2) And this one really gets me. It's bad enough to have to modify your 
> code every operating system update, but with AJAX and LASLO, you now 
> have to provide maintenance on every browser version update (Firefox, 
> IE, Safari, Konqueror, Opera, PDA browsers(?)) as well as every Flash 
> plugin update. Not to mention you're at the total mercy of the creators 
> of those products as well as all the standards committees who are 
> 'pushing for nextgen' type stuff. So, if Macromedia thinks Flash is too 
> difficult to program and change their scripting paradigm for Flash 
> (they've done it 3 times before!)-- your hosed. Or, MS decides to no 
> longer play nice with CSS standards groups because they don't want to 
> lose any more market share (heck they do this already with the .doc 
> format) and purposefully make their browser incompatible-- again you're 
> hosed.
> 
> 3) Ever try debugging AJAX apps? Whew!!! From what I know, there are 
> very few decent debuggers for Javascript and the XML doc object common 
> in browsers these days.
> 
> Just a few of the many reasons I don't really see the 'browser based 
> apps' ever really competing.
> 
> -Chipp
> _______________________________________________
> use-revolution mailing list
> use-revolution at lists.runrev.com
> Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your 
> subscription preferences:
> http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution



-----------------------------------------
Visit us at http://www.clearstream.com
                                                          
IMPORTANT MESSAGE

Internet communications are not secure and therefore Clearstream
International does not accept legal responsibility for the contents of
this message.

The information contained in this e-mail is confidential and may be
legally privileged. It is intended solely for the addressee. If you are
not the intended recipient, any disclosure, copying, distribution or
any action taken or omitted to be taken in reliance on it, is
prohibited and may be unlawful. Any views expressed in this e-mail are
those of the individual sender, except where the sender specifically
states them to be the views of Clearstream International or of any of
its affiliates or subsidiaries.

END OF DISCLAIMER