Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: Ajax or JavaFx

Expand Messages
  • sonofbluerobot
    Lehel, First, I would recommend deciding on your project s specs: Ajax is client-side AND server-side. also, depending on how you define Ajax in your
    Message 1 of 2 , Aug 21 4:02 PM

      First, I would recommend deciding on your project's specs: Ajax is client-side AND server-side. also, depending on how you define Ajax in your application, it's more than just JavaScript.
      Idk anything about JavaFx specifically, but I do know that Java is *best* kept server-side, if that. Yes, you can do anything with Java, but she's slow and bulky and her time in the limelight has passed (for now).
      Combine the advantages of Flash and Ajax? Flash has "Ajax" functionality already, it has for quite awhile. I'm assuming by Ajax you mean interacting with the server after the user has performed an action and returning content/media, etc., without refreshing the page. Yeah, Flash has that yo.
      Flash's time has passed (for now) as well; Anything you want to do in Flash can be done in JavaScript, except that when done in JavaScript, you get all the added bonuses of being non-proprietary, the programming language of the browser, as well as the SEO benefits that are non existent in Flash. Furthermore, you can utilize JavaScript as the Progressive Enhancement default weapon - force the browsers/media(s) to understand your markup/styles/code, make them bend to you.
      I'll go even further here: You can do this all, entirely in JavaScript; client-side, server-side, the whole 9 yards yo. You're going to need a JSlib or framework for the fx you want; sounds like you could use Raphael.js/YUI.js/ and/or the super awesome jQuery. If this is a massive application, I highly recommend rolling your jQuery into a modular, object-oriented JavaScript framework, like Dojo. You can tie Dojo or whatever you choose to use into node.js, which is the best thing to happen to this world since the sun came up. Node.js was built for the V8 JavaScript Engine (think really, really, really, uber fast), its an I/O framework that has most specifically been used to build web servers. Yes, web servers. Web servers that are literally lightning speed compared to Apache (sorry Apache) and that will (I shit you not) become the default standard in due time. That is, unless a better JavaScript server gets written. Or rather, until it is.
      So this is alot of information, but check it out yo, this is where node.js really nails it. YOU DON'T HAVE TO LEARN MORE THAN ONE LANGUAGE. YOU DON'T HAVE TO RELY ON THIRD PARTY and/or personnel to support you, you can do it all on your own, because it's the same language. sure, the techniques are different, but it's not like learning a new trix is anywhere as difficult as learning a new language.
      Plus, it's entirely/completely/magnificently open-source. You can go to github right now and fork the entire application you are trying to get done, albeit not in one piece, but still.
      JavaScript is the future. JavaScript is right now!!!!! Blowin' up all around us, but virtually the entire community is either clueless or in denial.

      Flash and Java are great programming languages and have their uses, however they do not lie in the realm of cutting edge web development. At least for now.

      Good luck! Get your DOM on!

      --- In JavaScript_Official@yahoogroups.com, lehelsipos@... wrote:
      > Hi,
      > I have to decide what to use on an internet application for client side programming. Ajax or JavaFx.
      > My client side application must be like an applet having some dyanmic graphs, tables, and animation.
      > I read that JavaFx is going to combine the advantage of flash and ajax. It is true?
      > What choice is the best to learn and use: JavaFx or Ajax? What is the future?
      > thx,
      > Lehel
      > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.