Comments on: GWT Demo - I rule! http://blog.xcski.com/2007/10/24/gwt-demo-i-rule Everything I used to bore people on newsgroups and mailing lists with, now in one inconvenient place. Tue, 07 Oct 2008 05:45:35 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6.2 By: Jed Davis http://blog.xcski.com/2007/10/24/gwt-demo-i-rule#comment-59033 Jed Davis Wed, 24 Oct 2007 15:53:50 +0000 http://blog.xcski.com/2007/10/24/gwt-demo-i-rule#comment-59033 My feeling is that the enabling technology of AJAX is the ‘J’, though I'll grant that XMLHttpRequest and friends are usually an improvement over monkeying with an IFRAME. (Which I've done, once, because I couldn't see any other way to talk to the network; the term “AJAX” entered common use about a year later.) My feeling is that the enabling technology of AJAX is the ‘J’, though I’ll grant that XMLHttpRequest and friends are usually an improvement over monkeying with an IFRAME. (Which I’ve done, once, because I couldn’t see any other way to talk to the network; the term “AJAX” entered common use about a year later.)

]]> By: Paul Tomblin http://blog.xcski.com/2007/10/24/gwt-demo-i-rule#comment-59019 Paul Tomblin Wed, 24 Oct 2007 11:21:28 +0000 http://blog.xcski.com/2007/10/24/gwt-demo-i-rule#comment-59019 Actually, the real enabling technology of AJAX is XMLHttpRequest. Without that, gmail would look like squirrelmail. Actually, the real enabling technology of AJAX is XMLHttpRequest. Without that, gmail would look like squirrelmail.

]]> By: Jed Davis http://blog.xcski.com/2007/10/24/gwt-demo-i-rule#comment-59002 Jed Davis Wed, 24 Oct 2007 03:42:42 +0000 http://blog.xcski.com/2007/10/24/gwt-demo-i-rule#comment-59002 “RIA”? Do people get paid to come up with new acronyms that are less meaningful than the old ones? As for “Web 2.0”, I've seen people opine that it's about user participation as much as or more than the use of client-side processing or snazzy visuals. I don't know how I feel about that, but then I'm not generally found using the term at all. “RIA”? Do people get paid to come up with new acronyms that are less meaningful than the old ones?

As for “Web 2.0”, I’ve seen people opine that it’s about user participation as much as or more than the use of client-side processing or snazzy visuals. I don’t know how I feel about that, but then I’m not generally found using the term at all.

]]> By: OldGrover http://blog.xcski.com/2007/10/24/gwt-demo-i-rule#comment-59001 OldGrover Wed, 24 Oct 2007 03:12:01 +0000 http://blog.xcski.com/2007/10/24/gwt-demo-i-rule#comment-59001 Web2.0 is the one that really bugs me. I mean, the technology behind AJAX, etc, is pretty much GETs/POSTs.. sounds pretty Web1.0 to ME! Yes, it is clever, but it is hardly all that and a bag of chips. Web2.0 is the one that really bugs me. I mean, the technology behind AJAX, etc, is pretty much GETs/POSTs.. sounds pretty Web1.0 to ME! Yes, it is clever, but it is hardly all that and a bag of chips.

]]> By: Paul Tomblin http://blog.xcski.com/2007/10/24/gwt-demo-i-rule#comment-58997 Paul Tomblin Wed, 24 Oct 2007 02:10:01 +0000 http://blog.xcski.com/2007/10/24/gwt-demo-i-rule#comment-58997 AJAX is a perfectly good name. The sort of people who call it RIA or Web 2.0 are the sort of people who think your word processor should be able to send email. AJAX is a perfectly good name. The sort of people who call it RIA or Web 2.0 are the sort of people who think your word processor should be able to send email.

]]> By: OldGrover http://blog.xcski.com/2007/10/24/gwt-demo-i-rule#comment-58996 OldGrover Wed, 24 Oct 2007 02:06:07 +0000 http://blog.xcski.com/2007/10/24/gwt-demo-i-rule#comment-58996 Interesting. I had looked at GWT and thought it seemed very cool, but for the (small) project I was undertaking, the amount of effort to get into it seemed high. I ended up using the YUI (Yahoo User Interface) as my AJAX / Web2.0 / RIA toolkit. And what's wrong with the name AJAX? Sheesh. They should send out a memo or something when all the cool kids start using a different name - I was calling it AJAX in my meetings today.. Interesting. I had looked at GWT and thought it seemed very cool, but for the (small) project I was undertaking, the amount of effort to get into it seemed high. I ended up using the YUI (Yahoo User Interface) as my AJAX / Web2.0 / RIA toolkit.

And what’s wrong with the name AJAX? Sheesh. They should send out a memo or something when all the cool kids start using a different name - I was calling it AJAX in my meetings today..

]]>