Seems as if I am acronym illiterate. -----Original Message----- From: Raj Saini [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, September 14, 2007 2:09 PM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: Rich UI for POS
AFAIK - As Far As I know IIRC - If I Remember (Recall) Correctly. There are many more, I cant recollect right now :-) Raj [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > BTW, I know what OOTB is, but how about "AFAIK"? > > Skip > > -----Original Message----- > From: Raj Saini [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Friday, September 14, 2007 2:54 AM > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: Rich UI for POS > > > How about its license? It is GPL and not even LGPL. AFAIK, you can not > embed this with commercial applications. > > Thanks, > > Raj > Cameron Smith wrote: > >> Hi, here is a general contribution about the use of "rich" technologies, >> > given the discussion about POS. > >> Note I am not talking about POS features, I am just talking about the >> > viability of these features. It is great fun to play with YUI, Dojo and > "Web 2.0 technology 57", but in terms of productivity my recommendation > would be ZK (www.zkoss.org) or an equivalent "fully fledged" framework. > >> We have been using the ZK framework with OFBiz for a while now (see >> > http://docs.ofbiz.org/display/OFBIZ/ZK+Rich+Client+-+integration+tutorial ) > . Up to now it was with 2-3 clients on a small, fully wired network. > >> However we have just put another system based on this combo, in production >> > , with a mixed wired/wireless network in a large building, and we have not > experienced latency problems except when the connection is wireless and > /extremely/ patchy (that is, unusable for anything, let alone intranet > apps). > >> I suspect on a WAN it would be a different issue. >> >> The users are not very IT friendly but have picked up the system (which >> involves quite heavy data entry) very fast, and IMHO that is partly >> because using a rich framework lets us make more user-friendly screens >> very easily. >> >> >> This is with ZK 2.4.1, and very little performance tuning. This is because >> > ZK takes care of the browser-server protocol in an optimised way. Apparently > ZK3.0 will have more OOTB performance tweaks, however I have not tested this > version yet. > >> All I can say is, we would never go back to "traditional" web development, >> > nor would we use "partial" toolsets like Dojo or prototype. Our > productivity and UI usability improvements have been too significant. We > would only consider moving "sideways" to another fully-fledged frontend > framework like Flex or OpenLaszlo. Although as I argue here > (http://www.theserverside.com/tt/articles/article.tss?l=ZKandAgile), so far > we are very happy with ZK. > >> cameron >> >> >> >> ___________________________________________________________ >> Want ideas for reducing your carbon footprint? Visit Yahoo! For Good >> > http://uk.promotions.yahoo.com/forgood/environment.html > >> > > > >
