Comments on: Fjax: Switching the A to F means what? http://ajaxian.com/archives/fjax-switching-the-a-to-f-means-what Cleaning up the web with Ajax Thu, 09 Feb 2012 06:55:33 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2 By: play online poker free http://ajaxian.com/archives/fjax-switching-the-a-to-f-means-what/comment-page-1#comment-198449 play online poker free Tue, 21 Nov 2006 11:06:00 +0000 http://ajaxian.com/?p=1788#comment-198449 <strong>online poker free </strong> Also online poker free online poker free

Also online poker free

]]> By: Bambi http://ajaxian.com/archives/fjax-switching-the-a-to-f-means-what/comment-page-1#comment-177976 Bambi Sat, 11 Nov 2006 21:14:42 +0000 http://ajaxian.com/?p=1788#comment-177976 FJAX is cool. I've seen flash and ajax combination on a chat site. Their developers call it ajax, I guess they are not bothered with the naming, but mixing flash with ajax gave them the best of the both worlds. Flash can maintain a live connection for chat and ajax is best for rendering data into html. Here is the chat implementation http://www.net-bits.net/flashchat20beta/chat.htm FJAX is cool. I’ve seen flash and ajax combination on a chat site. Their developers call it ajax, I guess they are not bothered with the naming, but mixing flash with ajax gave them the best of the both worlds. Flash can maintain a live connection for chat and ajax is best for rendering data into html. Here is the chat implementation http://www.net-bits.net/flashchat20beta/chat.htm

]]> By: Because I Write » Blog Archive » Ajax, Web 2.0, Web 2.1 and Fjax http://ajaxian.com/archives/fjax-switching-the-a-to-f-means-what/comment-page-1#comment-173964 Because I Write » Blog Archive » Ajax, Web 2.0, Web 2.1 and Fjax Fri, 10 Nov 2006 07:57:05 +0000 http://ajaxian.com/?p=1788#comment-173964 [...] For more indepth and technical coverage see this at Ajaxian. 2.0, ajax, Fjax, Software   « Trackback experiment for ezCount plugin |   [...] [...] For more indepth and technical coverage see this at Ajaxian. 2.0, ajax, Fjax, Software   « Trackback experiment for ezCount plugin |   [...]

]]> By: Fading Roses & Raging Viruses » Fjax? What’s that about? http://ajaxian.com/archives/fjax-switching-the-a-to-f-means-what/comment-page-1#comment-172920 Fading Roses & Raging Viruses » Fjax? What’s that about? Thu, 09 Nov 2006 21:56:26 +0000 http://ajaxian.com/?p=1788#comment-172920 [...] Fjax? What’s that about? [::[ Fri 10 Nov 2006 ]::[ General ]::[ ]::] Ajaxian has a post covering the much hyped Fjax alternative to Ajax. Off course the major flaw I see in Fjax is the F (which is the only “new” thing in Fjax anyway), Flash. I personally hate Flash, not because it’s not powerfull and you can’t do a lot of things with it, but let’s be honest, Flash scales horribly. The point of Ajax becoming so popular is the fact that it required no extra plugins, add-ons or whatever you may call it, it just runs out of the box. If now we switch over to a Flash based solution we loose one of the major drivers in Ajax’s short history. As Ajaxian puts it: Jay and Steve McDonald didn’t like traditional Ajax (the libraries, the XML parsing (even though you can use JSON of course)) and decided that they could create “smoother, more desktop-like web experiences that AJAX promises”, as they said in an interview at juxtaviews.com. What is Fjax? Website: “Fjax is an open, lightweight, cross-browser methodology for Ajax-style web 2.0 development Fjax is a technique focused on drastically streamlining the XML handling layer of web 2.0 applications. Picture Ajax’s XML parsing and handling with less than 65 lines of code! It’s not a replacement for toolsets that provide presentation-layer visual gizmos. Think of it as a new engine to put under the hood of all the great widgets that are already out there.” Now, the image I draw may be a bit too dark, but we are moving away from all the REST-Architecture, service modelling, and other great things Ajax has brought to use, exaclty like the comet stuff some months ago. I’ll give Fjax a chance to prove itself but it is has no killer feature that might justify the hype about it right now. [...] [...] Fjax? What’s that about? [::[ Fri 10 Nov 2006 ]::[ General ]::[ ]::] Ajaxian has a post covering the much hyped Fjax alternative to Ajax. Off course the major flaw I see in Fjax is the F (which is the only “new” thing in Fjax anyway), Flash. I personally hate Flash, not because it’s not powerfull and you can’t do a lot of things with it, but let’s be honest, Flash scales horribly. The point of Ajax becoming so popular is the fact that it required no extra plugins, add-ons or whatever you may call it, it just runs out of the box. If now we switch over to a Flash based solution we loose one of the major drivers in Ajax’s short history. As Ajaxian puts it: Jay and Steve McDonald didn’t like traditional Ajax (the libraries, the XML parsing (even though you can use JSON of course)) and decided that they could create “smoother, more desktop-like web experiences that AJAX promises”, as they said in an interview at juxtaviews.com. What is Fjax? Website: “Fjax is an open, lightweight, cross-browser methodology for Ajax-style web 2.0 development Fjax is a technique focused on drastically streamlining the XML handling layer of web 2.0 applications. Picture Ajax’s XML parsing and handling with less than 65 lines of code! It’s not a replacement for toolsets that provide presentation-layer visual gizmos. Think of it as a new engine to put under the hood of all the great widgets that are already out there.” Now, the image I draw may be a bit too dark, but we are moving away from all the REST-Architecture, service modelling, and other great things Ajax has brought to use, exaclty like the comet stuff some months ago. I’ll give Fjax a chance to prove itself but it is has no killer feature that might justify the hype about it right now. [...]

]]> By: Dan http://ajaxian.com/archives/fjax-switching-the-a-to-f-means-what/comment-page-1#comment-172805 Dan Thu, 09 Nov 2006 20:30:51 +0000 http://ajaxian.com/?p=1788#comment-172805 Second worse idea ever. First is still Ajax OS. Second worse idea ever. First is still Ajax OS.

]]> By: Programming in the State of 70% Drunkeness http://ajaxian.com/archives/fjax-switching-the-a-to-f-means-what/comment-page-1#comment-172723 Programming in the State of 70% Drunkeness Thu, 09 Nov 2006 19:16:26 +0000 http://ajaxian.com/?p=1788#comment-172723 <strong>Fjax - Really Innovative or Just Misleading?</strong> Personally, I’m still not 100% buying the idea of using a flash piece as the transport layer between client side and server side. It’s a good idea, it works, but just not well supported still. By reading the interview with Jay and Steve McD... Fjax – Really Innovative or Just Misleading?

Personally, I’m still not 100% buying the idea of using a flash piece as the transport layer between client side and server side. It’s a good idea, it works, but just not well supported still.
By reading the interview with Jay and Steve McD…

]]> By: James Hughes http://ajaxian.com/archives/fjax-switching-the-a-to-f-means-what/comment-page-1#comment-172663 James Hughes Thu, 09 Nov 2006 18:35:02 +0000 http://ajaxian.com/?p=1788#comment-172663 I am using FF2 and the Adblock Plus extension.... the tooltip example fails hideously due to the3 Adblock addition of the "block flash" tab. Not a fault of the Fjax stuff but still - its a popular browser and a popular add-on - should be considered. James. I am using FF2 and the Adblock Plus extension…. the tooltip example fails hideously due to the3 Adblock addition of the “block flash” tab. Not a fault of the Fjax stuff but still – its a popular browser and a popular add-on – should be considered.

James.

]]> By: Mike http://ajaxian.com/archives/fjax-switching-the-a-to-f-means-what/comment-page-1#comment-172611 Mike Thu, 09 Nov 2006 17:53:57 +0000 http://ajaxian.com/?p=1788#comment-172611 Whoa. I've never seen someone "reinvent the wheel" to such a degree. Whoa. I’ve never seen someone “reinvent the wheel” to such a degree.

]]> By: ARWolff http://ajaxian.com/archives/fjax-switching-the-a-to-f-means-what/comment-page-1#comment-172501 ARWolff Thu, 09 Nov 2006 16:45:30 +0000 http://ajaxian.com/?p=1788#comment-172501 If you're familiar with the American letter-grading system for primary and secondary education, the title of this 'blog post is instructive :) If you’re familiar with the American letter-grading system for primary and secondary education, the title of this ‘blog post is instructive :)

]]> By: Theo http://ajaxian.com/archives/fjax-switching-the-a-to-f-means-what/comment-page-1#comment-172466 Theo Thu, 09 Nov 2006 16:11:53 +0000 http://ajaxian.com/?p=1788#comment-172466 Sorry, but I must continue my rant. These guys don't know what they are doing. From the interview: <blockquote> One of the things I see as a barrier to further adoption in heavy duty projects is that its source file format (.FLA) is not fully accessible, that is, there’s always an interface layer between me and my source code. I can’t easily get at the raw stuff of my work, like I could with a C# or VB.Net project. On a couple of occasions, I have had FLA files corrupt, and I had to back up and rebuild. This doesn’t happen when your source is essentially just a text file. </blockquote> As of ActionScript 2 (two years old) you have your code in separate class files, the .fla doesn't actually have to contain anything, and before that you had the #include statement. Looking at their code, and reading their white paper I'm amazed by their ignorance and lack of understanding. Sorry, but I must continue my rant. These guys don’t know what they are doing.

From the interview:

One of the things I see as a barrier to further adoption in heavy duty projects is that its source file format (.FLA) is not fully accessible, that is, there’s always an interface layer between me and my source code. I can’t easily get at the raw stuff of my work, like I could with a C# or VB.Net project. On a couple of occasions, I have had FLA files corrupt, and I had to back up and rebuild. This doesn’t happen when your source is essentially just a text file.

As of ActionScript 2 (two years old) you have your code in separate class files, the .fla doesn’t actually have to contain anything, and before that you had the #include statement.

Looking at their code, and reading their white paper I’m amazed by their ignorance and lack of understanding.

]]> By: AccesoBit.com » Fjax – Cambiando A por F http://ajaxian.com/archives/fjax-switching-the-a-to-f-means-what/comment-page-1#comment-172456 AccesoBit.com » Fjax – Cambiando A por F Thu, 09 Nov 2006 16:06:40 +0000 http://ajaxian.com/?p=1788#comment-172456 [...] | Fjax Vía | Ajaxian Enviar a un amigo por E-mail | URI para TrackBack. Categoria: Web2.0 [...] [...] | Fjax Vía | Ajaxian Enviar a un amigo por E-mail | URI para TrackBack. Categoria: Web2.0 [...]

]]> By: Theo http://ajaxian.com/archives/fjax-switching-the-a-to-f-means-what/comment-page-1#comment-172450 Theo Thu, 09 Nov 2006 15:55:43 +0000 http://ajaxian.com/?p=1788#comment-172450 Woa! Wait a minute. I'm a Flash developer, and I'm ready to go from Flash to Ajax, <em>because of the lousy, worthless and slow</em> XML support. Flash 9/ActionScript 3 changes this, but "huge install base" is not relevant there. I would bet my boots on Fjax being way slower than the equivalent Ajax application when it comes to the XML handling, if not else because of having to send data over the bridge. Looking closer, they don't actually use the ExternalInterface, as you would expect, but callback by calling a "javascript:"-url... and it looks as though they create a new instance of the Flash application for every call. Hello? Overhead? And the site didn't work for me either, works in Safari, but not in OmniWeb, they are both WebKit-based, so it seems that someone has done something weird. And not supporting the back button is lame. SWFObject+SWFAddress makes it supersimple in Flash, and there are very light implementations for Ajax too. I'm not even slightly interested. It looks like utter rubbish. Woa! Wait a minute. I’m a Flash developer, and I’m ready to go from Flash to Ajax, because of the lousy, worthless and slow XML support. Flash 9/ActionScript 3 changes this, but “huge install base” is not relevant there.

I would bet my boots on Fjax being way slower than the equivalent Ajax application when it comes to the XML handling, if not else because of having to send data over the bridge.

Looking closer, they don’t actually use the ExternalInterface, as you would expect, but callback by calling a “javascript:”-url… and it looks as though they create a new instance of the Flash application for every call. Hello? Overhead?

And the site didn’t work for me either, works in Safari, but not in OmniWeb, they are both WebKit-based, so it seems that someone has done something weird.

And not supporting the back button is lame. SWFObject+SWFAddress makes it supersimple in Flash, and there are very light implementations for Ajax too.

I’m not even slightly interested. It looks like utter rubbish.

]]> By: Stephen Clay http://ajaxian.com/archives/fjax-switching-the-a-to-f-means-what/comment-page-1#comment-172406 Stephen Clay Thu, 09 Nov 2006 15:15:27 +0000 http://ajaxian.com/?p=1788#comment-172406 In Opera 9 FJAX is just <a>"...loading"</a>. In Opera 9 FJAX is just “…loading”.

]]>