Ajax Applications Survey

I tail gated to a survey “Almost a Clean Sweep: About 3 in 4 Use AJAX” through Javalobby and was also surprised with the statistics and the way it is projected comparing the language/technologies that have been used to build the application.  The survey should have been all about how many applications are AJAX based out of all the applications built in a given period rather also including the technologies used to build them.  Each of these technologies has evolved in its own way and has its own advantages and disadvantages.  Most likely the statistics would be something significantly different in the next year.  But the way this survey has been taken, it has taken more attention on which language/technology is best to use in terms of implenting AJAX.  I was rather glad some of the comments to the O’Reilly XML.com post which talk about how the survey should have been. But on the actual survey, it also points out couple of downsides to AJAX namely security and complexity.  It is very true that they are disadvantages but we also understand that nothing comes for free.  There has to be a tradeoff in each and everything we opt for, there will be some downsides but how much you can compromise to overcome the downside is more important.  As people overcome the difficulties looking at the positives it brings technology will evolve to overcome those complexities.

Blink this Ajax Applications Survey at blinklist.com    Bookmark Ajax Applications Survey at blogmarks    Bookmark Ajax Applications Survey at del.icio.us    Digg Ajax Applications Survey at Digg.com    Fark Ajax Applications Survey at Fark.com    Bookmark Ajax Applications Survey at Furl.net    Bookmark Ajax Applications Survey at NewsVine    Bookmark Ajax Applications Survey at reddit.com    Bookmark Ajax Applications Survey at Simpy.com    Bookmark Ajax Applications Survey at Spurl.net    Bookmark Ajax Applications Survey with wists    Bookmark Ajax Applications Survey at YahooMyWeb

      Cosmos

Leave a Comment

authimage


Creative Commons License  This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 2.5 License.