Comments on: How JavaScript Crossed the Chasm

By: Hugo

Hugo — Fri, 16 Mar 2007 17:43:49 +0000

Again, and again people tend to mix stuff that isn’t mixable at all. C++? Web? Two very different objectives for the applications developed by them. I worked for 5 years developing winforms using vb6 and then c#/vb.net. For the past 2 years I’ve been developing a corporate application using only asp.net and sql server 2k. The integration of multiple systems into a giant application is something I don’t wish to many people. I did find that the user experience when going from winforms to web drops dramatically. Drag n’ drop? Only recently. Fast user feedback? Depends on the company hardware, network, etc… In my opinion, all these technologies will evolve into a singular framework, much like the .net clr, but one that encompasses all these ‘niceties’ and doesn’t crash windows (we hope). In the future (maybe not so far), I believe there will be only the OS and a fast net access that allows any user to ‘ask’ for a specific software and If one doesn’t exist already to do the job, then a ‘AI-bot’ will build it in a matter of seconds.

just speaking my opinion

By: Andrew

Andrew — Sat, 23 Sep 2006 18:20:06 +0000

(Pardon my English).
(Not to affend or in line with the article ?mayBe?)
I myself believe the webmasters of today see a future of the web as replacing the the MS Office package, Believe me i have seen true believers believe that the web is the future, i myself is not afraid to say that I may be wrong to believe that this wil be a fase, where web-applications working as a nice tool, even tough i said it’ll be a “fase”, a period where that will pass, and yes i know the IBM story of a “couple of machines”, but serius, does anyone know the power of C/C++ anymore, sorry I can’t explain it here and now, but i believe some day, as it ones was, where WebMasters and Programmers where a different kind of people, Sorry if i offend som of you people that do not shear my opinion, but i believe. some day that i do nat see a web page does not control my BIOS.

Just an opionon

Agein Pardon my English.

By: Rob Lambert

Rob Lambert — Wed, 24 May 2006 02:25:38 +0000

I think that another key thing that enabled the current JavaScript/rich web application boom is the fact that IE6 stood stagnant for 5 or 6 years, enough time to figure out workarounds for all the IE non-standard oddities. At the same time, Mozilla-based browsers and Safari are somewhat close to standards-compliant and therefore writing rich JavaScript/CSS/DOM-manipulating web applications is feasible and you can make it work on 98% of the general users’ browsers. Let’s hope that IE 7 doesn’t hose things up!

By: bob

bob — Thu, 11 May 2006 15:00:24 +0000

I was taught, as a Web Developer, that Server Side was always better than client side.

If you use a Server Side Script, it runs the same in all browsers.

The user cannot deactivate it in the options for his browser.

YOU have control over what happens, without leaving this up to the user on the client side.

Since then, Ajax and Web 2.0 have hit the web, but I still believe that what I learned back then is true.

I can see cases where it’s useful to the user’s experience to update a page without having to do a reload, and in this case Ajax has a rightful place and purpose.

But most of the time peoples’ usage of Ajax in websites is just to dazzle and is kind of akin to wanking off…and it simply annoys, much in the same was as Flash Websites annoy me.

But time will tell !

By: John Dowdell

John Dowdell — Thu, 16 Mar 2006 23:37:58 +0000

I agree with you on the popularity of Firefox among a-list designers having such a rejuvenating effect on JavaScript perception. The addition of XmlHttpRequest, years after its intro by MSIE/Win, made the whole “AJaX” press cycle possible too, I suspect.

Learning costs I’m not sure of… if you’ve already mastered the HTML specs, the CSS specs, the DOM specs then additional JS costs may be lower than Flash, but otherwise SWF may be easier. Answer depends on what the question is.

Are you aware that the XML-based authoring approach of Flex 2 is free-of-cost to use?

One pro-Flash angle which complements your above points: Flash Player updates your audience’s machines faster than any other technology on the net. Operating system upgrades are slow… browser disparities means you have to wait for multiple implementations to converge… people download Flash Player far, far faster than any browser update. The 8.0 Player hit 50% consumer viewability after 15 weeks of distribution, which is a completely incredible number. You get new clientside features faster with Flash — most rapid evolution.

ECMAScript is the core commonality in all this, btw.

jd/adobe

By: Trevor Stow

Trevor Stow — Tue, 14 Mar 2006 12:56:12 +0000

I think it’s a mistake to dismiss Flash outright (just as it would have been a mistake to write off Javascript, five years ago).

True, too many websites were once built in Flash that would have been better done in plain HTML, but today, Flash still serves some needs better than any other technology:

banner ads
streaming video

A new license for Flash is approx $500. For professional use, that’s a fairly modest price point. Yes it’s proprietary technology, but in my 6+ years of using it, I’ve rarely had a grievance with the mothership (then Macromedia; today Adobe).

By: Gary van der Merwe

Gary van der Merwe — Tue, 14 Mar 2006 05:48:15 +0000

I would like to correct you on a point you made. You claim that there was no debugger for Javascript in IE. There was. Using MS Visual Interdev, which was realsed in 1998, you could attach to an IE process, and debug javascript.

I don’t think that many people knew this though

By: Jeff Magee

Jeff Magee — Tue, 14 Mar 2006 00:11:10 +0000

The internet history in a nutshell was very interesting to me, as a new guy to to web development. One of the most interesting phenomona of the whole industry is the open source movement, like Mozilla, Plone and other organizations. Are there specific open source development projects that you would say have really been a catalyst for the “rebirth” of javascript?

What literature would you recommend that reflects this view that javascript is a language with a very exciting future? I think that someone who really believes that is more likely to write a solid technical guide with a look toward the language’s possibilities.

Also… as a young guy it sounds so crazy that people ever saw the internet as a depressing, unexciting trend! Poor foresight I would say…

Interesting article.

By: Engineered Robotics

Engineered Robotics — Mon, 13 Mar 2006 23:32:23 +0000

Ugh. Javascript is still a hack and it’s still ugly and still isn’t cross-browser compatible. That people have created usable libraries in it is more a testament to hacker perseverence than it is to any sort of inate “elegance” on Javascript’s part.

The only thing that changed in the past two years is that AJAX libraries became commonly available — which work in _both_ Internet Explorer and Mozilla browsers. That’s a first. And it’s important because it allows developers to use Javascript without having to actually code in it.

By: js

js — Mon, 13 Mar 2006 18:10:24 +0000

Uh, also javascript is the only scripting anguage supported by web browsers. Maybe that had something to do with it.

By: notany@gmail.com

notany@gmail.com — Mon, 13 Mar 2006 16:45:48 +0000

This is same thing over and over again.

Please, everybody! Read all the Worse vs. Better essays from Richard P. Gabriel. There is more than the classic first Worse Is Better

This is the page:
http://dreamsongs.com/WorseIsBetter.html