On Jul 9, 5:32 am, Jarkko Laine <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Cheer up, mate. If your time is so valuable, I don't think it's worth > spending too much of it flaming people who are trying to help you and > others. You might be too busy to apply a new technology right now, > but never spending a day or two to learn new things is bound to > shorten your career quite a bit, considering the speed at which > things are evolving in our field.
I would think everybody's time is valuable. Second, I'm not flaming anybody. Third, spending a day or two to support something as different as Flash, is simply building a house of cards. This is a regular topic that comes up, and people easily adopt third party solutions without knowing how to service the chunks of code that they put into their systems. Once they realize it's close, but has issues in their application, they have gone live and realize their app has a major hole in it, of which they have little skill to fix, without hiring someone to do it for them. > Also, I'm sure hackers will appreciate your attitude of putting as > much responsibility as possible on the user. Like Peter said, you > might take a big hit on the server if people try to upload too big > files, keeping a server process or thread busy during the whole > upload time before you can do anything about it. Try filtering the div upon submit. Second, you also assume my application is open to spammers. You never thought this might be in a business application on an intranet? > I've never done it but I wouldn't think starting to use an uploader > such ashttp://swfupload.mammon.se/would take too much time. You just mentioned exactly what I see happen on regular occasions. People adopting pieces of code outside of their knowledge in order to fill a need in their app. If it fails, you rely on that person's limited website, and their ability to respond to their email. >From a business perspective, that is a huge risk. Massive. You are building a house of cards that is just poised to fail, without taking the time to investigate fully, the ramifications of it either not fully accomplishing what you need, or it breaking. Second, if they were so popular and it was that easy to accomplish where the responsible developer was fully content, how come we don't see this much more regularly? So I go back to my original comment. It's a huge mistake to do that, without the investment of time to properly address the needs of the code. You want to slap together third party solutions based upon people mentioning stuff in blogs? Go right ahead. The main reason I'm in here to begin with is because a 1.5.1.1 version of one of the first AJAX libraries, isn't behaving the way it should. And I've asked other developers to review the code, and they are equally as stumped. If something as pervasive as Prototype can show issues like this, I certainly don't want to rely on some kid's Flash. --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Ruby on Rails: Spinoffs" 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/rubyonrails-spinoffs?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
