What is Digg?Sponsored by AVG
Windows 7 Needs An Extra Layer of Security view!
free.avg.com - AVG Anti-Virus Free 9.0 works with Windows 7, to provide the best protection against web threats.
91 Comments
- JimmyP22, on 10/07/2008, -4/+135Numbers 3,4,11,12,16,17,18 & 19 have NOTHING to do with Ajax!
"Ajax" isn't just a buzz word - It's not something you can just throw around to sound impressive! It means something! - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AJAX - connieLingus, on 10/07/2008, -0/+36why not call them javascript effects instead of AJAX?
- mrfish, on 10/07/2008, -2/+21Yes I agree. As a developer you could have said "Neato Web Tricks" and I would have still dugg it!
But a BIG DIGG goes for taking the time to say SRC and DEMO for each item. Very usefull - jonespr, on 10/07/2008, -1/+19Nice list of great scripts.. afraid jimmyp22 is right, some of the are not ajax scripts though. some are just plain javascripts build on javascript classes like prototype etc.
- Narcism, on 10/07/2008, -0/+17You mean client-side interactions that have nothing to do with a server call aren't Ajax? ;o
- Nicoon, on 10/07/2008, -1/+17because of the misconception of what AJAX actually is and the propagation of this misconception.
- shadowspawn, on 10/07/2008, -0/+12Ah, an article about Ajax.
When you follow the links you are led to things that don't work, can't download, kill a server, under constant development, and all just barely proof of concept tethered with a lack of discovery for performance impact.
Yep, sounds like Ajax.
-rant-
Spaghetti Programming. Throw more horsepower at it, then it'll work. Dugg to prove a point.
/-rant- - prgmctan, on 10/07/2008, -1/+10I stay logged in so I never have to post comments explaining why I felt compelled to log in.
- Nicoon, on 10/07/2008, -3/+11I'm sure a lot of people will take offense by this, but..
Nettuts is a noob tutorial site, powered by other noobs. The nettuts community pay little or no attention to stuff like semantics, design-agnosticism, progressive enhancement, accessibility etc.
It's all an evil circle of bad web development being propagated to more developers. - RickyTheRiot, on 10/07/2008, -0/+8At this point I would just like to give my JavaScript joke..
What is this... eval("{x:0,y:0}");
An axis of eval..
*ba*doom*tish* - dangerz, on 10/07/2008, -0/+5Great article and lots of neat stuff. Just remember to use it all within reason and not throw 400 effects on your websites because they look neat.
Also, like everyone else has said, AJAX != DHTML - jsghagan, on 10/07/2008, -0/+5Why is it that anytime someone has something negative to say, people always come back with 'Why don't you come and do better?'...Why would Nicoon want to go in and clean up someone else's mess? I wouldn't...
- inactive, on 10/07/2008, -0/+5A long time ago it used to be called DHTML.
- VerticalEvent, on 10/07/2008, -0/+43 can have some AJAX component to it, like, for example, an already taken username.
4 is valid, since it is storing the information on the server... thought, to make it real AJAX, it should be returning something.
The rest are very valid as non-AJAX - Lichtinator, on 10/07/2008, -2/+6Incorrect - For many of the numbers you mentioned the javascript could be making server calls. In some cases it could make sense to make a server call for validation or in a situation where the data could be changing rapidly.
Example: for #4 they are saving your changes using ajax (there is a line confirming this) - LucasVB, on 10/07/2008, -0/+3See, that was Nicoon's point. The tutorials teach newcomers how to do things the wrong way, and they miss core concepts of modern web development such as the ones he mentioned. This has to be there from the beginning, IMO.
The internet is a different place nowdays and we cannot afford more webpages done the wrong way. Sticking to good practice is key for helping the internet achieve its true potential (with semantics, accessibility and content-rich websites), and nettuts just isn't helping us with that. - Smuikas, on 10/07/2008, -0/+33 doesn't use XMLHttpRequest
4 does
Holy *****, 11 is 200kb - ZIPPED. Probably because it includes scriptaculous.
18 definitely doesn't
some of them are just JS libraries that include AJAX functionality...
Kinda lame. - mmockett, on 10/08/2008, -0/+3var f6 = new LiveValidation('f6');
f6.add( Validate.Numericality, { minimum: 9000!!!!!!!!! } ); - Mutton, on 10/08/2008, -0/+3Well done. I award you five AOLs.
- weif, on 10/08/2008, -0/+3Because people think that javascript is bad and for some reason think that AJAX is good.
Now, there are uses for javascript and AJAX both, but usability and bandwidth issues must be taken into consideration (which often aren't).
But I think the use of the term AJAX for this list, not all of which are AJAX, is primarily for the sake of buzzword compliance. - MisteryMeat, on 10/07/2008, -1/+4We're going to stop using the HTTP *protocol* for the web?
- rattler72, on 10/07/2008, -0/+3Agreed... everyone of these can be using AJAX.
- JoshuaGross, on 10/08/2008, -0/+3Buzzwords sell better than sex.
- iandflp, on 10/07/2008, -0/+2Dugg for including Julio Cortázar.
- cgibbo, on 10/07/2008, -1/+3It's an old and outdated protocol that wasn't meant for this kind of stuff. Granted, it can handle it for now, but this isn't what it was intended to do.
http://www.networkworld.com/news/2007/072505-futur ... - Smuikas, on 10/07/2008, -0/+2@LucasVB:
Seriously. It's a place where people who don't understand how to actually program. If they did, they would just go to crockford's site to brush up on JavaScript and go at it. Propogation of tutorials like this lead to sites with megs of useless JS that load even more megs of external files.. Just plug stuff in, and then wonder why it takes 30 seconds just to scroll down the page - without actually accomplishing anything useful for the user.. - strictnein, on 10/07/2008, -1/+3Asynchronous Javascript and XML
- redwallhp, on 10/07/2008, -0/+2@inparo, if the inline editing script phones home to the server to store the edits asynchronously...
- ajames01, on 10/08/2008, -0/+2Friday. Around 6:43pm.
- Nicoon, on 10/07/2008, -0/+2His point is still valid.
- RickyTheRiot, on 10/07/2008, -1/+3well f*ck me, the majority actually use XMLHTTPRequests (AJAX is a term for the ignorant marketeers). Only a few are not actual requests, so fair play to that. Disappointingly the author doesn't understand the difference, and includes #12, #16, #18 and #19 which have as much to do with "ajax" as black has with white (ie: neither are colours) but overall not a bad list.
Personally I have my own libs (and I would say more focussed and more efficient libs) to do this, but as this is one of the better "ajax" list, I'll digg it. - tikal2k, on 10/08/2008, -0/+2Dugg for being tech, and relevant to web development.
- daridave, on 10/30/2008, -0/+1Love it, but the problem is, I'm not going to just download those scripts... I'm going to recreate them all my way. I just can't use a script if I don't understand what every single byte of code does -- it makes me nervous and I go crazy, I just have to do my own.
Those heatmap and jcrop tools are sa-weet ideas... big thanks for the inspiration, now I'm doing it my way... - cuco, on 10/08/2008, -0/+1In all seriousness and I don't mean to be confrontational... but what is a good site for us noobs to learn what you are describing???
- jaygeeze, on 12/10/2008, -0/+1I never heard of Prototype UI it looks really, really cool, thanks for sharing.
- stockjones, on 10/08/2008, -0/+1All you need to know: Jquery
- mbraynard, on 10/08/2008, -0/+1Being a noob - you want to define some of those terms?
- svivian, on 10/07/2008, -0/+1#12 is AJAX - it displays folders images and when you click on it reads the folder on the fly. Unnecessary to be honest since it would be more efficient to just store a list of files/folders in a database or file, and load the whole list on the first page load. It would be quicker.
And that's part of the problem with using AJAX - making too many unnecessary requests. Fine to submit a form with AJAX and send back validation results, but to do that for every field as you type is overkill. - findhostcoupons, on 03/22/2009, -0/+1Thanks for these excellent effects! Thumb up, man!
- ithkuil, on 10/08/2008, -0/+1Right, and we have to keep trying to explain this but I have a feeling that the reality is that unless we are going to spend 15 or 30 minutes educating people before we get into a discussion about the functionality of our web pages with non-developers (or even many developers now unfortunately) we will be misled if assume people know that this is supposed to refer to XMLHTTPRequests and not just any sort of JavaScript behavioral enhancement. (I have no problem with extending the general usage to synchronous requests at least with less technical groups but that's another issue). So now you have to ask yourself questions before you start talking about behavior on web pages: Do I want to spend time trying to explain what this term means and will this person understand? Often even if they understand the distinction when you explain it they will later forget and then you just have to focus on specific ways that they would like to see functionality enhanced. Once you get into a set of possible specific behaviors for a page or a site I think that you have got around this unfortunate semantic degradation. (Of course this is a common problem with natural language (especially technical) and presenting a set of specific interpretations is my usual approach.)
- earmouse, on 10/07/2008, -0/+1it's the hunger.. fight it!
- redwallhp, on 10/07/2008, -0/+1Or DHTML...
- Nicoon, on 10/07/2008, -1/+2Are you serious?!
- sancho320, on 10/08/2008, -0/+1Google does offer a heatmap, but for links only, this version shows you where people click, even if it's not a link. It is very useful if you have really busy pages and don't really know how people are navigating your site, also it takes about 5 minutes to install.
- papalock, on 10/07/2008, -2/+3Not all Ajax implementations are Asynchronous nor use XML. Therefore, the title should be referred to as plain Javascript Effects.
- sancho320, on 10/08/2008, -0/+1Oh thank goodness, I was worried you were going to for a minute.
- bashfulczar, on 10/07/2008, -0/+1Though the title is completely incorrect, I won't digg it down because the content was still pretty worthy.
- RickyTheRiot, on 10/07/2008, -0/+1I "heart" digg.
Post something sensible and you're dugg down.. ;)
I love you guys... xxx - bzaks, on 10/08/2008, -0/+1http://www.instantrimshot.com
-
Show 51 - 93 of 93 discussions
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is