Hi Aaron
Any application could potentially operate this way - for instance you might
want to create orders (or any kind of transaction) off line and then upload
them when you are connected again. You might want to get some base data
files and then do some reporting or presentation of data. With the amount of
local storage available now you can have any number of local lookup tables
to support a disconnected app.
Your thinking that the application has to be centrally controlled or
maintained, that it has to live where the database lives. It doesn?t have
to, but it can, or you can have both.
I am guessing your next comment will be along the lines of database
synchronization and maintaining data integrity in the face of a distributed
environment. I understand that's an issue, but people working in technology
are asked to solve problems, not dictate how things should be done because
of any particular technical view they might have about how things "should
be".
If you can't see it, then cool. But consider this: way back in the day
people considered PC's a waste of time; moving the apps out this way seems
like a natural extension of this at one level, at another level it's déjà
vu.
FWIW I am not commenting on what is necessarily best or right, just what I
think I see starting to emerge.
Regards
Evan Harris
-----Original Message-----
From: web400-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:web400-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx] On
Behalf Of Aaron Bartell
Sent: Wednesday, 24 December 2008 9:09 a.m.
To: Web Enabling the AS400 / iSeries
Subject: Re: [WEB400] JavaFX viability was->Re: Pete's web5250
>The other thing you can't easily do with HTML and Javascript is provide
an off-line secure sandboxed environment that allows for a local database
to operate transparently with the browser and app and provides off-line
or
disconnected operations. Curl and the Google App engine for instance have
this capability built-in (according to the docs).
Maybe I just don't get it, but I believe the ability to run apps
disconnected is of limited value and only really applies to certain types
of applications where work is more of a personal thing (i.e. email, music
player, calendar, etc) vs. being able to use that mindset with the vast
other number of applications that an organization needs. You have to
remember that the vendors creating things like the Google App Engine
don't
do a lot of business application development (i.e. Inventory, shipping,
order entry, accounting, etc), and instead the focus on things that, are
again, based more on a single user and thus a small local "data base" of
information needing to be stored if running "offline".
Maybe it's just me and I don't see the need as much for "offline" apps.
Just think of all the green screen or browser apps you have written to
date for your business - what of those could go into offline mode? BTW,
that isn't a rhetorical question, I would actually like my ignorance to
be
corrected, but I just don't see it.
Aaron Bartell
http://mowyourlawn.com
Evan Harris wrote:
Hi Walden
I really don't see it this way at all.
Sure you can build rich stuff, but doing it is clunky, not standardized and
unproductive. The average developer struggles to get his head around all of
it because there's a lot to learn and too many choices to make.
I don't see these things as applets - I seem them as a rich interface being
delivered into the browser and kind if replacing it by stealth. No-one was
going to easily move away from the browser.
The other thing you can't easily do with HTML and Javascript is provide an
off-line secure sandboxed environment that allows for a local database to
operate transparently with the browser and app and provides off-line or
disconnected operations. Curl and the Google App engine for instance have
this capability built-in (according to the docs).
Regards
Evan Harris
-----Original Message-----
From: web400-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:web400-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx] On
Behalf Of Walden H. Leverich
Sent: Wednesday, 24 December 2008 4:24 a.m.
To: Web Enabling the AS400 / iSeries
Subject: Re: [WEB400] JavaFX viability was->Re: Pete's web5250
"XAML and the sun - it the same - don't look directly into it"
LOL... how true. However, even MS will tell you, unless you're a tool
vendor, don't use XAML directly. It's not meant for human consumption,
unless you're one of those uber-geeks that likes to play with fire. Any
_business_ developer that is learning XAML is nuts! Give it a release
and we'll be rather well abstracted away from it.
Having said that, I oppose any move away from HTML! You can get pretty
damn rich (UX wise) with just HTML and javascript. Introducing
Silverlight, Flash, Flex, JavaFX, whatever, is just trying to use
applets and activex again with different names... Didn't work too well
the first time around.
-Walden
midrange.com
