[wp-hackers] AJAX

[Elliott Franklin Cable]

I'm going to re-quote two parts:
> Decoration doesn't need AJAX: it never has, and it never will  
> solely rely
> on it.
I agree. Key word: solely.

> I don't think _AJAX_ is important
> for design.
I disagree. See above.

It can be used to aid design - a good design can become even better  
with AJAX; or become much, much worse. Same as images - a design can  
become much, much better with proper use of images, and become much,  
much worse with too many / badly done ones. It's all subjective, and  
too much of anything is a bad thing when it comes to design. A good  
designer can make a page with nothing but HTML and CSS, and black and  
white with straight lines look more attractive than a bad designer  
can make a page with flashy images and AJAX and Flash accents and all  
sorts of tools. These are just that - tools, nothing more - they are  
what you make of them. It's how good the designer is that matters,  
not how good the tools are.

On Jun 29, 2006, at 10:03 AM, Computer Guru wrote:
> I have to disagree with you entirely then...
>
> Decoration most certainly isn't useless, and every point you make  
> is 100%
> valid - but I don't see why you need AJAX to do it.
> Certainly - the widgets plugin would be a lot less comfortable to use
> without AJAX, but how much harder are drop-down boxes with numbers  
> in them
> that determine the order (the same forums are ordered in IPB,  
> phpBB, etc.)
>
> Decoration doesn't need AJAX: it never has, and it never will  
> solely rely
> on it.
> Some of the best designed sites don't use AJAX - I never said  
> design wasn't
> important, nor did I ever think that, but I don't think _AJAX_ is  
> important
> for design.
>
> CPanel, Helm, Plesk, whatnot: none use AJAX, yet some are easy to  
> use while
> others aren't. Nothing to do with AJAX, but everything to do with  
> how much
> time the Devs wanted to spend on planning the design and making it  
> easy to
> use.
>
>
> But I _do_ see your point, very well too. Look at Digg.com: the  
> only reason
> it's more popular than the other user-provided and rated services  
> before it
> is that it makes it all easier: no need to reload a page to "digg" and
> item: just click as many buttons as you want. (compare that to  
> ratings on
> Slashdot - eugh!)
>
> So, yeah, Decoration isn't useless, but 99.9% of the time using  
> AJAX for
> decoration is.
>>
>> Yeah... i actually must say I do stray a TAD toward the use-ajax  
>> extreme, if only for two reasons:
>>
>> 1) I disagree with you - I'd say that in 99.9% of cases, AJAX is  
>> 40-50% useless. Decoration is *not* useless - a good user  
>> experience is essential to any application, any site, any...  
>> anything. I used to host on MediaTemple - then switched to  
>> DreamHost because they were cheaper. As soon as I got in, I looked  
>> at the control panel and though *euck* - but I put up with it,  
>> hell it was cheaper and everything else in the features seemed  
>> better. Guess what? The support SUCKED. At least, compared to  
>> (mt)'s unofficial 10-minute rule. I go back to mediatemple, notice  
>> how well designed and clean the control panel is - easy to find  
>> anything, fun to use - and the overall hosting experience was  
>> BETTER! Ever used Plesk? It is TORTURE. Because it is so horribly  
>> designed and laid out. My point is that good design, an  
>> *enjoyable* interface is not only AN element of a good service -  
>> it is an _ESSENTIAL_ element of a good service! So using AJAX for  
>> decoration isn't not only a bad thing, it can be a good thing  
>> (this works the other way around, however - you can use too much  
>> AJAX, make the user sick of it, and WORSEN their experience; and  
>> again, AJAX is only an element, and a relatively new one at that,  
>> of that elusive creature _good design_)
>>
>> 2) I am a Rails developer. Adding AJAX effects in rails is like  
>> wearing a different pair of pants, you know, the cool jeans,  
>> instead of those old stuffy khakis. No extra work really, just a  
>> decision.
>>
>> The only real PROBLEM with AJAX is when people use it and *DON'T*  
>> provide obvious alternatives. It's the rule of developers, if you  
>> use a technology to make a task easier for your user, make sure  
>> that task can be done (albeit a bit less easy, perhaps) WITHOUT  
>> the technology.
>> When people fail to do this, AJAX is blamed. It's a techie case of  
>> 'Guns don't shoot people, people shoot people', nothing more.
>>
>> On Jun 29, 2006, at 9:36 AM, Computer Guru wrote:
>>> It would help if you replied directly to the messages ;P
>>>
>>> But yes, I agree. AJAX isn't the be-all end-all it's made out to be,
>>> but nevertheless, it is the _only_ way the web can represent a true
>>> application platform.
>>> AJAX provides a (theoretically) seamless way for data-streaming of
>>> GET/POST without refreshing or reloading a page - but in 99.9% of  
>>> the
>>> circumstances it's 100% un-necessary.
>>>
>>> Look at where AJAX is used in WP (fading boxes for messages, and the
>>> widgets bar - nothing else AFAIK).
>>> The first is useless: pretty, but useless The second is broken in  
>>> many
>>> browsers - rendering it useless.
>>>
>>>> I don't understand people like this >.<
>>>>
>>>> Sure, AJAX isn't *everything* people crack it up to be, but...
>>>> it's not useless, it's still pretty cool, it's worth integrating  
>>>> in a
>>>> tasteful measure... i jsut don't understand people who fall in with
>>>> either extreme on most subjects....
>>>>
>>>> On Jun 29, 2006, at 8:44 AM, Robert Deaton wrote:
>>>>> Sounds like more useless Web 2.0 OMGAJAX bloat to me.