> I think Flex is a better solution for developing desktop-like > applications that have a requirement of broadband service or > will be focused on internal networks (similar to > client/server apps). For a typical consumer-oriented website > where you need to accommodate for a variety of connection > types and bandwidth requirements, Ajax is better suited and > provides excellent features for providing desktop-like > functionality.
Flex applications can work pretty well without any more bandwidth than a typical web application. The big limitation is the requirement of Flash Player 9, and related to that the inability to run Flex applications without a standard desktop computer. > Having worked extensively with the technologies used in > building Web 2.0-style applications, I can tell you that > they're far from band-aids and that HTML still rules supreme > for web application development. I've worked extensively with those same technologies before anyone came up with names like "AJAX" and "Web 2.0", and they are exactly that - band-aids. Of course, HTML still rules supreme for web application development, but that's not because it's a great fit for applications, it's because everyone has a browser. After about thirteen years, HTML applications are almost - but not quite - reaching the level of functionality of client-server applications built in Visual Basic 3! But, believe it or not, they still have a long way to go before they get there. Maybe in another few years, we'll be able to do the same stuff in HTML that we could in a typical desktop application in 1993. HTML and HTTP were not designed for applications. Making applications work in the HTML/HTTP model means throwing away lots of functionality that is taken for granted in other environments. Attempts to redress that, like XmlHTTPRequest (and hidden frames, gif pipes, etc) are, for all intents and purposes, band-aids. I'm not saying you shouldn't use them - HTML and HTTP are the current standards for application delivery, and anything you can do to improve that medium is a good idea. But it still sucks, comparatively speaking, and we should all hope to see something fundamentally better in the future. There's no reason why Flex can't be that fundamentally better thing. Dave Watts, CTO, Fig Leaf Software http://www.figleaf.com/ Fig Leaf Software provides the highest caliber vendor-authorized instruction at our training centers in Washington DC, Atlanta, Chicago, Baltimore, Northern Virginia, or on-site at your location. Visit http://training.figleaf.com/ for more information! This email has been processed by SmoothZap - www.smoothwall.net ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| ColdFusion MX7 by Adobe® Dyncamically transform webcontent into Adobe PDF with new ColdFusion MX7. Free Trial. http://www.adobe.com/products/coldfusion?sdid=RVJV Archive: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/CF-Talk/message.cfm/messageid:274796 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/CF-Talk/subscribe.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4
