Discover the best of the web!
Learn more about Digg by taking the tour.
10 things IT needs to know about AJAX
networkworld.com — Ajax is one of the more disruptive new Web technologies traveling across networks today. To help you minimize future surprises on your network, we've outlined the 10 things you should take to heart about Ajax.
ubernoggin- 1275 diggs
- digg it
- LewP, on 04/02/2008, -32/+15hahahaha everytime I digg a story, a goofy little symbol pops up where the number of diggs is supposed to be....I don't know if you can see what I see...but it's funny!
- ubernoggin, on 04/02/2008, -2/+8Heh.... April Fools!
- kittnerrules, on 04/02/2008, -0/+11Did you miss the article with 16,000+ diggs that explains this?
- aliengoods, on 04/02/2008, -0/+1He dugg it, so he didn't know what the final count was.
- junkwheel, on 04/02/2008, -1/+3Yeah! It's a big lol!
LoL - bbart3d, on 04/02/2008, -0/+1p.s. AJAX technology put that goofy symbol there.
- mehson, on 04/02/2008, -15/+4Great Article!
Thanks to the author- fkr3, on 04/02/2008, -3/+3Yeah awesome.... this new technology sounds interesting. If only I had a time machine and could travel back a decade I could be an early adopter.
- frooo, on 04/02/2008, -0/+72Good article, I like Ajax in theory, but unfortunately when you get into the trenches, AJAX annoys the crap out of me.
Heh, the thing about AJAX that annoys me most are the companies that pander it about like its easy to implement.
Client: "Yeah, what we want is a web 2.0 site with AJAX, RSS and SEO done by Friday next week... oh and we want it for about $150 cos I know a guy who's son makes websites for about that much"
Me: "Sure thing, in fact I like you so much, I'll actually give you guys my money, just for the opportunity to develop this for you!"
F*#k buzzwords!- Entroper, on 04/02/2008, -0/+47"Pay your friend's son the $150 and see what he comes up with. I'll see you next Friday, and we can talk about a more serious offer."
Technology companies are often very poor at discerning knowledge from talent. It's not the hammer and chisel that makes a beautiful sculpture, it's the artist wielding them.- jsd8cc, on 04/02/2008, -2/+10That was truly a beautiful word picture. *tear*
- fugazied, on 04/02/2008, -1/+3If browsers played nice with it, it WOULD be easy to implement and fulfil some nice functions. As it stands you know Internet Explorer will behave in unusual ways when JS is added and even Firefox has issues with JS. The JS frameworks do make a lot of AJAX work easy, but browser issues eat up a lot of time.
- blackinthmiddle, on 04/02/2008, -0/+6I don't know if it's just browser issues. You also have race conditions that you have to check for.
For example, I built an ajax chess game. I use a serialized object and I realized I was running into a number of race conditions where one user was grabbing the object from the database before the other user finished updating it and putting back in the database. I often found myself having to store the results of back end calls in local files, as I didn't have any good way of testing what was going on.
Also, dealing with requests that for whatever reason got swallowed by the server can be difficult. Okay, the client didn't get a response. Should it send a request again? If the request was to insert a number of rows in a table on the back end, how do you know this didn't already happen? Maybe the request died before it hit the server. Maybe it died on the round trip. I found that a good percentage of my chess app was spent on error checking.- mahdaeng, on 04/02/2008, -1/+3Leave it to someone that calls himself, "blackinthmiddle", to bring up race conditions.
/hey, settle down everyone, it's just a joke! :^)
- mahdaeng, on 04/02/2008, -1/+3Leave it to someone that calls himself, "blackinthmiddle", to bring up race conditions.
- blackinthmiddle, on 04/02/2008, -0/+6I don't know if it's just browser issues. You also have race conditions that you have to check for.
- kevdotbadger, on 04/02/2008, -0/+3Argh, i've been through this!
Some guy's throws a bunch of buzzwords at a client not really knowing what they mean. HTML, XML, CSS, AJAX, JS, PHP, .NET, ASP, DOG. Then the client comes to you telling you what the guys said and it doesnt make any sence.- mahdaeng, on 04/02/2008, -0/+4Tell me about this DOG technology. Is it new?
:^)
- mahdaeng, on 04/02/2008, -0/+4Tell me about this DOG technology. Is it new?
- sdrumsalot, on 04/02/2008, -0/+2Using xmlHttpRequests objects are simple, it is putting the requests in some meaningful form without posting back to the server that is difficult. Best thing to do is write a reusable AJAX API. This article is really not that great, the writer makes something difficult out of something very simple, furthermore, the use of AJAX is meant for building client-rich internet apps which use the clients machine for data processing/transformations, freeing up lots of processing that is typically done server-side.
- jasonsalas, on 04/03/2008, -0/+1i hate it when clients specifically request SEO. it's like asking to build a site with links.
- frooo, on 04/03/2008, -0/+1woot, 69 diggs - I love that number :)
- Entroper, on 04/02/2008, -0/+47"Pay your friend's son the $150 and see what he comes up with. I'll see you next Friday, and we can talk about a more serious offer."
- Jovensdesciple, on 04/02/2008, -19/+2It sniffs cleaner than meth, but the high doesn't last as long. That's neither here nor there though, the comments above mine are lame. Also i bet the comments below mine are lame too. You guys should quit while you're ahead (thanks to me).
- Delphium226, on 04/02/2008, -2/+6You should just get some head or give some head, whatever it takes for you to wind your neck in.
- secrity, on 04/02/2008, -4/+8"make sure your developers understand the network impact of their applications."
When has that ever done any good? - allfatherblack, on 04/02/2008, -0/+4Some times I hear about technologies or languages or code-bases or blah blah blah whatever and I think to myself "This seems like a lot of unnecessary abstraction for what could otherwise be a simple concept."
- Entroper, on 04/02/2008, -0/+7Indeed. Last time I was at Barnes and Noble, I picked up an AJAX book to skim through while I drank my coffee. I got through the introduction and said, "that's it?" It's just a buzzword applied to a set of technologies that were already there.
Good article, though. Definitely some good pitfalls to avoid. Especially timeout acknowledgement -- web 2.0 apps are incredibly poor at handling these.
- Entroper, on 04/02/2008, -0/+7Indeed. Last time I was at Barnes and Noble, I picked up an AJAX book to skim through while I drank my coffee. I got through the introduction and said, "that's it?" It's just a buzzword applied to a set of technologies that were already there.
- csshyamsundar, on 04/02/2008, -2/+21All in one page -- http://www.networkworld.com/cgi-bin/mailto/x.cgi?p ...
- seejunaid, on 04/02/2008, -3/+4AJAX PRO of Michael Schwarz is the one of the best to use if you're using ASP.net.
- nirav72, on 04/02/2008, -1/+1It is a good solution if you like messing a round with httphandler configurations. However, if you want simple ajax controls in asp.net, then try something like anthem.net or microsoft's ajax.net . However, the latter is somewhat bloated.
- peorth, on 04/02/2008, -0/+1Michael's AJAX.net library saved me LOTS of time! (L)
- nirav72, on 04/02/2008, -1/+1It is a good solution if you like messing a round with httphandler configurations. However, if you want simple ajax controls in asp.net, then try something like anthem.net or microsoft's ajax.net . However, the latter is somewhat bloated.
- nirav72, on 04/02/2008, -5/+4How the hell did this make it to the front page. 2005 called and they want their headlines back. WTF? I think any decent IT shop should be aware of the pitfalls associated with Ajax and annoyances. There are many benefits, but they should be balanced carefully. I'm all for Ajax, but its getting a little old to jump on the latest buzzword bandwagon.
Plus the ***** been around for almost 8 years now. People just took notice of it in the last 3 years.- Veretax, on 04/02/2008, -1/+2Some MS Shops are only now beginning to dip into AJAX for actual use now, where before they probably were not. That is not their fault.
- marcoionox, on 04/02/2008, -9/+1Buried for dupe:
http://digg.com/programming/10_things_IT_needs_to_ ... - Delphium226, on 04/02/2008, -0/+9One thing that bothers me about Ajax is accessibility issues it raises.
- kevdotbadger, on 04/02/2008, -2/+16Also, prepare for people with javascript disabled.
- element247, on 04/02/2008, -0/+3if only...
- sdrumsalot, on 04/02/2008, -1/+0You make your html/javascript gracefully degrade so the site falls back to typical server-side postbacks
- NinjaBoy, on 04/02/2008, -3/+1***** people who disable javascrpt. If they don't want to use the 90% internet thats their own fault.
- Vagari, on 04/02/2008, -0/+4This reminds me of a project I was working on last year. A developer put in some code for one of those "live searches" on a division's web site. Working with localhost he didn't realize that he was sending ridiculous amounts of traffic for every single key press. When he tried to move it live every subsequent character you put in exponentially slowed down the page. The freak out call I got that day was no fun.
- whisperedlie, on 04/02/2008, -0/+4any web app developer that doesn't have an expected model for network traffic of a proposed implementation, and then doesn't gather actual traffic patterns using any one of the myriad http debuggers or packet sniffers should be shot. or slapped... or given a stern talking to. well, i'll leave that up to you.
- ghinch, on 04/02/2008, -1/+2Saying your site will be more secure with HTTP Only Cookies is like saying it will function better with CSS3 and HTML5: sure it will but what percentage of your market is really going to be able to use it?
- stinkymountain, on 04/02/2008, -1/+1Great information, Plus, I enjoyed the slideshow.
- zammit, on 04/02/2008, -2/+3i hate the buzzword crap... and async js is fairly straight forward, but dugg for great pointers.
- leerayIG88, on 04/02/2008, -2/+3I know a "Jax" from Mortal Kombat....does that help?
- RobotLeAwesome, on 04/02/2008, -2/+1it's stronger than dirt.
- sdrumsalot, on 04/02/2008, -2/+2The only thing a server should do is send data, update databases, and perform secure processing. Everything else like data transformation (creating HTML server-side) and unsecure data processing should be done via javascript/AJAX. There is no reason to use the server for something a clients machine can easily do, that is the whole reason for the push towards AJAX and rich internet apps. You should get to writing a reusable AJAX API. The guy who wrote this article seems like he simply needed to write an article to keep his job and he couldn't think of anything else to write about, he makes something sound very difficult and painful when it is not. If anything, AJAX is great for servers and networks since it eliminates unnecessary processing done server-side.
- arcticsoft, on 04/02/2008, -0/+2how does a clients machine easily do this with javascript turned off?
- sdrumsalot, on 04/02/2008, -0/+0You write gracefully degrading code such that if javascript is turned off the site falls back to server-side posting (or simply display a message telling them to turn there javascript on). According to w3c, 98% of computers have javascript enabled, so most will just show the "turn on javascript message". Seriously who has javascript turned off these days...wow.
- arcticsoft, on 04/02/2008, -0/+2how does a clients machine easily do this with javascript turned off?
- galleryfront, on 04/02/2008, -0/+3How XML fell into the internet data format of choice is beyond me. If server load has ever been the concern, AMF should have been where it was at.... 1/9th the size of data exchange per data item, on average. One word: SmashedApples.
- Niubai, on 04/02/2008, -0/+1Nice one, I hope the people who's labeling anything fancy nowadays as AJAX (even when it's only used javascript and/or some effects from some library) read this article.
- noufalelettil, on 04/02/2008, -0/+0nice
- Dvara, on 04/02/2008, -0/+0Also, don't make your site as crappy and inaccessible as this POS: http://www.nandos.co.uk/ - it reeks of ajax for the sake of ajax and is actually amazingly worse than their previous site (which was god awful in itself).
- Sapsucker, on 04/02/2008, -0/+2Wait wait wait. Let me make sure I've got this straight. A technology article....on the front page of digg? Wowwwwwwwwww...
- calcm, on 04/02/2008, -0/+0I work with ajax via the dojo toolkit and json instead of xml. After a year and a half of programming I can say ajax has its place but it is just one way not the way of doing things. Ajax has its place but javascript really isn't the greatest computer language around and the more I do it the more I miss plain ole Java. I can hardly wait until this buzzword and 15 minutes of fame is over with. Yeah, fine the widgets in dojo are pretty cool but once you are over the hype you will understand that dojo is pretty buggy and the ajax concept is not always the only way to do things. Just my humble opinion of course.
- sdrumsalot, on 04/02/2008, -0/+0Just to make things clear, people keep saying "what if javascript is disabled". According to the w3c, about 98% of computers have javascript enabled, so you are talking about a small fraction of computers (who seriously turns off their javascript...lame), not to mention you can build websites which gracefully degrade from javascript/AJAX to normal server-side posting (I build all my websites that way).
- antych, on 04/04/2008, -0/+14) Plan for an increase in HTTP requests
- wrong, the point of Ajax is to refresh only relevant part of your page which saves you from refreshing it completely. Thus, you don't load all the js, css and images again, which LOWERS the number of HTTP request and make your site more responsive. - jordanclark, on 04/10/2008, -0/+0@antych:
>> 4) Plan for an increase in HTTP requests
>> - wrong [snipped]
Err, I think you'll find that's correct: HTTP requests *will* increase. Somebody please correct me if I'm wrong, but to my understanding, although individual page reloads will decrease, an HTTP request is required every time a query is made or an update is performed.
It isn't called the XMLHttpRequest object for nothing, after all ;) - habenneas, on 04/16/2008, -0/+1LynxCache mirror: http://www.lynxcache.org/usr/1/10_things_IT_needs_ ...
- Bombfrog, on 04/28/2008, -0/+0Learning a lot more about javascript and how to decrease the amount of work done on the server has helped us create some great apps but it doesn't come overnight. It's probably taken a year for use to really switch to doing things "the ajax way".
We statred off using ASP.NET AJAX as it makes things very easy, but quickly realised it's a bit crap and slow and now do everything using raw javascript and jQuery.
© Digg Inc. 2008 —
Content posted by