It has the same compatibility as the XHR object... so its fairly global - in that I have seen no one comment that it has a more narrowed accessibility than normal AJAX.
Drawbacks come in terms of potential scalability. Without the ability to test the load it might put on IIS by keeping that connection alive. However, the only problems I've seen posted on scalability affect Rails - and a solution now exists which buffers the requests from the Rails webrick server... It would be nice to see the implications on IIS, but alas - I have not seen them http://ajaxian.com/archives/comet-a-new-approach-to-ajax-applications Fabio wrote: > Hi > > Do you need first at all tell us about browser compatibility and drawbacks. > In general, appears a nice idea. > > []'s > Fabio > > On 6/17/06, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > Michael, > > > > I would like to propose an upgrade to the Ajax.NET Professional > > library, more specifically the request handling. > > > > Since there is a hard limitation of 2 open sockets per browser - why > > not have the option to only use 1 for active requests, and keep the > > other open with the server to allow for server pushes, introduced by > > the dojo library as COMET. This could really help bridge a critical > > gap in web development. By allowing the server to actively push data > > to the client - can really cut down on polling and offer a much richer > > real-time experience for the user. I would be interested to hear your > > thoughts / comments on this, as well as others. It could be an > > initialization option, in regards to whether to reserve one of the > > sockets as a comet socket or to use both as normal xhr requests. > > > > > > > > > > > ------=_Part_4827_14780873.1150517913427 > Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 > X-Google-AttachSize: 1396 > > Hi<br><br>Do you need first at all tell us about browser compatibility and > drawbacks. In general, appears a nice > idea.<br><br>[]'s<br>Fabio<br><br><div><span class="gmail_quote">On 6/17/06, > <b class="gmail_sendername"><a href="mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]"> > [EMAIL PROTECTED]</a></b> <<a href="mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]">[EMAIL > PROTECTED]</a>> wrote:</span><blockquote class="gmail_quote" > style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; > padding-left: 1ex;"> > <br>Michael,<br><br>I would like to propose an upgrade to the Ajax.NET > Professional<br>library, more specifically the request handling.<br><br>Since > there is a hard limitation of 2 open sockets per browser - why<br>not have > the option to only use 1 for active requests, and keep the > <br>other open with the server to allow for server pushes, introduced > by<br>the dojo library as COMET. This could really help bridge a > critical<br>gap in web development. By allowing the server to > actively push data<br> > to the client - can really cut down on polling and offer a much > richer<br>real-time experience for the user. I would be interested > to hear your<br>thoughts / comments on this, as well as others. It > could be an<br>initialization option, in regards to whether to reserve one of > the > <br>sockets as a comet socket or to use both as normal xhr > requests.<br><br><br> > ------=_Part_4827_14780873.1150517913427-- --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Ajax.NET Professional" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/ajaxpro The latest downloads of Ajax.NET Professional can be found at http://www.ajaxpro.info -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
