Historicaly, there’s a big gap between the richness and responsiveness of Desktop applications and that of Web technologies. The same simplicity that enabled the Webs rapid proliferation also creates a gap between the experiences it provides compared to the experiences users can get from a desktop application.
That gap is closing. Take a look at Google Suggest. Watch the way the suggested terms update as you type, almost instantly. Now look at Google Maps. Zoom in. Use your cursor to grab the map and scroll around a bit. Again, everything happens almost instantly, with no waiting for pages to reload.
Google Suggest and Google Maps are two examples of a new approach to web applications that Adaptive Path have been calling Ajax. The name is shorthand for Asynchronous JavaScript XML, and it represents a fundamental shift in whats possible on the Web.
Ajax isnt a technology. Its really several technologies, each flourishing in its own right, coming together in powerful new ways. Ajax incorporates:
* standards-based presentation using XHTML and CSS;
* dynamic display and interaction using the Document Object Model;
* data interchange and manipulation using XML and XSLT;
* asynchronous data retrieval using XMLHttpRequest;
* and JavaScript binding everything together.
read more at adaptive path ? ajax: a new approach to web applications.
Archive for
Sunday, May 22nd, 2005 09:50 pm GMT +8
...
Several years ago, Microsoft posted an article titled “The Ten Immutable Laws of Security”.
This article extends / updates those laws a bit. Note rule#10 Technology is not a cure, solution, magic potion, panacea.
A separate team of climate scientists, which was regularly used by Science and the journal Nature to review papers on the progress of global warming, said it was dropped after attempting to publish its own research which raised doubts over the issue. …
As with Dr Peiser’s study, Science refused to publish his rebuttal. Prof Bray told The Telegraph: “They said it didn’t fit with what they were intending to publish.”
Prof Roy Spencer, at the University of Alabama, a leading authority on satellite measurements of global temperatures, told The Telegraph: “It’s pretty clear that the editorial board of Science is more interested in promoting papers that are pro-global warming. It’s the news value that is most important.”
He said that after his own team produced research casting doubt on man-made global warming, they were no longer sent papers by Nature and Science for review – despite being acknowledged as world leaders in the field.
Are these guys qualified to have an expert opinion on global warming ? Well, if they were regularly being consulted for reviewing publications submitted to the very same journal, that suggests that the journal editorial staff considered them reasonably competent — that is, until they decided to disagree.