Just a quick .02 from me. Your last statement grabbed my attention... "Do you think AJAX is or will be as useful and powerful as CF?"
I think maybe you're looking at AJAX wrong. AJAX is something that is typically used in conjunction with CF, PHP, ASP.NET, etc. AJAX is there to do a couple of things: 1. Improve the interface/interaction for end users 2. Reduce the amount of network traffic (less reloading of images, etc) 3. Create a more universal interface (use of JSON or XML can be used among many server platforms including CF, PHP, ASP.NET, etc) Chances are, you're still going to be using CF at least as a back end to retrieve, store, validate, etc. You will probably even use it for the front end and intermingle your AJAX with your CF. That is the most common usage of AJAX. If you're scared of it a bit, I would suggest using existing libraries to ease your pain. There are several good ones out there, my favorite being: http://www.jquery.com/ http://prototypejs.org/ So, don't think of AJAX as replacing languages, think about it as accompanying them. And, a thought on the Google interfaces or even other ones...just because you hear that Google has an AJAX interface doesn't mean you can't use ColdFusion to grab the data and parse it just as Javascript does! AJAX is just a method for retrieving data. Think of it as cfhttp in javascript. Anything you can call through AJAX, you can call through a CFHTTP (or even a browser's own url)... Hope that helps a little. Allen -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Forrest C. Gilmore Sent: Friday, February 08, 2008 3:03 PM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [ACFUG Discuss] will Ajax go away (was JVM version and ColdFusion) Some interesting benchmark results! Also thanks for noting the security issues, etc. with AJAX and Javascript. I guess my somewhat negative attitude toward AJAX has to do with its Javascript underpinings. It's Javascript that I tend to dislike. I mean, I like being able to write code that runs in the browser and lets you do things like data validation and build "smarts" into the page, but it is so quirky, case sensitive, and difficult to troubleshoot that it's very time-consuming to use. One good thing is that it's easy to copy and use code developed by others. However, users can easily turn off Javascript in their browsers, and many do so because of the "bad" things some sites do with it. The thing I love about CFML is that it uses tag-based code that is generally very understandable, encapsulates most of the underlying complexity, and gives very helpful error messages. I've not found any other web page coding language that is as easy to use. Granted, it has it's limitations, but I still prefer to use CFML and CFX code wherever I can. One downside, however, is that some CF functions actually generate Javascript code in the HTML page returned from the server. At least I don't have to worry about the syntax of that JS code! Now, if Google and others want to design services that I can easily invoke in a way that is not prone to error, or at least gives clear error messages, I don't care whether it's AJAX or anything else. Have you found these AJAX APIs easy to implement and error-free? While I'm in no way a professional programmer, over the years I have used Fortran, Dartmouth Basic, MS Basic, Visual Basic, Delphi (Pascal based, originally), and Lotus Notes Script (similar to Javascript and Basic), in addition to CF Script and CFML. My professional career was ending as the C languages and Java were coming to the forefront, so I didn't see the need to get into these technologies. When CF came along, I felt that Jeremy Allaire and Ben Forta were really onto something that would make it possible for amateurs like me to get some useful work done using the web. Do you think AJAX is or will be as useful and powerful as CF? Forrest C. Gilmore ============================================ Darin Kohles wrote: > Speaking of Benchmarks: http://www.jamesward.org/census/ > > On Feb 8, 2008 11:52 AM, Darin Kohles <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> You can always build a Flex (or Flash for that matter) application >> that can be put in you page as a 1px by 1px (I'm not sure if 0 by 0 >> will work) that has nothing on the stage with wmode="transparent". >> This application can now act as your portal between the browser via >> JS using the External Interface (or fsCommand going back to Flash ~6). >> Then your "invisible" Flex/Flash app can leverage all the connection >> types available (AMF/SecureAMF, Webservice, HttpService etc...) in a >> manner that is not easily accessible to any hacker (you can hide all >> kinds of security checks within this app). >> >> I've always wanted to do a bench mark of this type of app side by >> side with standard Ajax, but the bottom line is that the only browser >> specific code would be in how the returned data is applied to effect >> the client content. >> >> >> On Feb 8, 2008 11:20 AM, shawn gorrell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> >>> Charlie, my main issues with AJAX are dealing with cross-browser >>> issues, and security. >>> >>> AJAX exposes some of the most annoying cross-browser DHTML sort of things. >>> Using libraries and frameworks can insulate you from that to a >>> degree, but not always completely. I've got a customer doing things >>> with Google Maps and we've had some differences between IE and FF >>> that have been difficult to solve. >>> >>> People have gotten so excited about using AJAX that they have >>> forgotten basic security principles (things like validating input). >>> I recently read an article that discussed the security holes in the >>> more commonly used frameworks, so the issue isn't just with roll >>> your own AJAX, it is more pervasive. >>> >>> But, those things said, ultimately I think it is a step forward in >>> making a richer browser experience (not as much as Flex though). >>> There are just some fleas on the dog that folks should be aware of in advance. >>> >>> >>> >>> ----- Original Message ---- >>> From: Charlie Arehart <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >>> To: [email protected] >>> Sent: Friday, February 8, 2008 10:58:47 AM >>> Subject: [ACFUG Discuss] will Ajax go away (was JVM version and >>> ColdFusion) >>> >>> That seems a curious statement, Forrest, and I'm sure some would >>> enjoy a bit of discussion on it. For those who weren't following >>> closely, he had asked first about some challenges using a CFX_google >>> custom tag, and in the replies he was told that it's quite old and >>> instead Google favors some Ajax APIs instead. Forrest replies he hoped the "Ajax thing would just go away". >>> >>> So, do you realize that Ajax is merely a way to make browsers >>> smarter? It enables them to make calls to remote servers. Sure, we >>> could do that in the past with Java applets, ActiveX controls, Flash, and even plain Javascript. >>> And we could of course do it from the server using either REST or SOAP apis. >>> Ajax is just a simplified API to enable that very javascript-based >>> client-server interaction. For those who need to talk to servers >>> from clients (either because they can't or don't want to involve a >>> server to proxy the communications for them), we don't want them to >>> go back to Java and ActiveX, do we? :-) And while we may wish >>> everyone would use Flex, it's just not likely. Many will, for the >>> much larger problem space it solves, but for the average web >>> developer, it's not really as simple as dropping in some AJAX API calls. >>> >>> If Google (or other vendors) want to create a way for people to >>> connect, and they want to make it work regardless of what web app >>> server platform people use (and as well for those who have no >>> server), and they provide an Ajax-based API to what (I suppose are >>> otherwise REST-based) services, that's seems to be just being smart, widening the pool of possible users. >>> >>> Look at it another way (for us CFers), they (like Amazon, Ebay, and >>> others) could instead just document calling from Java, ASP.NET, and >>> PHP. They tend to not go that one step further to include CF. At >>> least by their offering a platform-agnostic solution that doesn't >>> require any server-side processing, they've helped more than just those who have no server to make calls from. >>> >>> Just some thoughts. I'm not fanatical about all this, and I may well >>> myself be missing a point. But since this is the ACFUG "discussion" >>> list, that comment seemed one worth discussing. :-) >>> >>> /charlie >>> >>> -----Original Message----- >>> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Forrest C. >>> Gilmore >>> Sent: Thursday, February 07, 2008 5:30 PM >>> To: [email protected] >>> Subject: Re: [ACFUG Discuss] JVM version and ColdFusion >>> >>> Thanks, Charlie. Your comments were very helpful! >>> >>> I have been hoping that this AJAX thing would just go away, as it >>> seems to be to be a step backwards, but it looks like it will be >>> around a while longer! >>> >>> Forrest C. Gilmore >>> ======================== >>> Charlie Arehart wrote: >>> >>>> Forrest, I realize you've perhaps abandoned the effort, but I'll >>>> throw out some clarification if it's useful, first about the >>>> JRE/CFX issue, then about calling the google search APIs. >>>> >>> <snip> >>> >>> >>> >>> ------------------------------------------------------------- >>> Annual Sponsor FigLeaf Software - http://www.figleaf.com >>> >>> To unsubscribe from this list, manage your profile @ >>> http://www.acfug.org?fa=login.edituserform >>> >>> For more info, see http://www.acfug.org/mailinglists Archive @ >>> http://www.mail-archive.com/discussion%40acfug.org/ >>> List hosted by http://www.fusionlink.com >>> ------------------------------------------------------------- >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> ------------------------------------------------------------- >>> Annual Sponsor - Figleaf Software >>> >>> >>> To unsubscribe from this list, manage your profile @ >>> http://www.acfug.org?fa=login.edituserform >>> >>> For more info, see http://www.acfug.org/mailinglists Archive @ >>> http://www.mail-archive.com/discussion%40acfug.org/ >>> List hosted by FusionLink >>> ------------------------------------------------------------- >>> > > > ------------------------------------------------------------- > Annual Sponsor FigLeaf Software - http://www.figleaf.com > > To unsubscribe from this list, manage your profile @ > http://www.acfug.org?fa=login.edituserform > > For more info, see http://www.acfug.org/mailinglists Archive @ > http://www.mail-archive.com/discussion%40acfug.org/ > List hosted by http://www.fusionlink.com > ------------------------------------------------------------- > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------- Annual Sponsor FigLeaf Software - http://www.figleaf.com To unsubscribe from this list, manage your profile @ http://www.acfug.org?fa=login.edituserform For more info, see http://www.acfug.org/mailinglists Archive @ http://www.mail-archive.com/discussion%40acfug.org/ List hosted by http://www.fusionlink.com ------------------------------------------------------------- ------------------------------------------------------------- Annual Sponsor FigLeaf Software - http://www.figleaf.com To unsubscribe from this list, manage your profile @ http://www.acfug.org?fa=login.edituserform For more info, see http://www.acfug.org/mailinglists Archive @ http://www.mail-archive.com/discussion%40acfug.org/ List hosted by http://www.fusionlink.com -------------------------------------------------------------
