|
|
Posted by Stan McCann on 02/12/06 02:11
David Segall <david@nowhere.net> wrote in
news:ldgru1dtunp98q33h9l65viovvie8kh4o9@4ax.com:
> Stan McCann <me@stanmccann.us> wrote:
>
>>David Segall <david@nowhere.net> wrote in
>>news:jj9pu155m4mk1scucjee84tkg9s38u3plv@4ax.com:
>>
>>instant feedback as with a desktop application that I have read
>>about to know that it is relatively safe and I know what it is going
>>to do before it does it.
> Obviously I did not explain clearly what I meant. Ajax and
> alternative technologies are not intended for _you_. All the sites
> you need to use and who want you to visit will work with Javascript
> turned off.
>
> A rich web client is necessary when users need to use a web based
> application extensively for their day-to-day work. Have a look at
> http://www.salesforce.com/. A large company could afford to install
> a Customer Relationship Management system using, say, a virtual
> private network and a thick client. Salesforce.com provides similar
> performance using their servers and only a web browser installed on
> the users machine. Similar applications are being developed for
> in-house applications because the network is simpler to maintain and
> they are much easier to deploy.
>
I was reading your previous message as that Ajax is yet another
language for web developers to try to "take control" of the browsing
environment. I also read yesterday about another scripting method
client side through an FF extension that can rewrite poor HTML, CSS,
and scripting? I don't remember what it is called just now, but it
piqued my interest enough that it deserves a further look.
Somebody in this group (you?) provided the link. Interesting stuff.
--
Stan McCann, "Uncle Pirate" http://stanmccann.us/
Webmaster, NMSU at Alamogordo http://alamo.nmsu.edu/
Now blocking Google Grouper posts and replies.
http://blinkynet.net/comp/uip5.html
Navigation:
[Reply to this message]
|