Flash or Ajax?
Wednesday November 26, 2008
I was reading this article on c|net the other day Flash, HTML, Ajax: Which will win the Web app war? and it got me thinking. In some ways DHTML and Ajax are the same thing, or at least very similar, so the war is really between Ajax and Flash. Ironically, a lot of the issues people have with Flash pages are similar to issues found on Ajax pages. Ajax tends to seem to load faster, but poorly written Ajax applications can be confusing and hard to use, just like poorly written Flash pages. I wonder if if 2-3 years Ajax will be as annoying to some people as Flash is now. What do you think? If you had to choose one or the other for a Web application, which would you choose: Ajax or Flash?
Comments
Ajax will become the dominant tool for web pages until a bigger and better web browser is built. Right now, it is the best method to exchange information with the server while providing an interactive experience for the user.
But Flash will always have it uses and some websites — like game websites — will gravitate towards it. Simply put, Flash delivers more Flash.
As for some Ajax or Flash websites being confusing — you can say that about every development tool in history and every development tool in the future — that’s usually a symptom of bad developers moreso than bad tools.
I say both, even though many “big” sites like Gmail, and Yahoo Mail for example use Ajax only for their user interfaces. I think Ajax is for a more utility/functional, and Flash for a more visual solution.
This is a difficult comparison to make, and in some ways floored. Each tool has it’s strengths in certain areas so will always have thier place.
Ajax has suffered from the same ‘mania’ that flash did when it first became popular, in that it was used for it’s own sake rather than wher the useer gained from its use.
Web based applications such as Gmail and the plethora of CMSs will always suite an HTML / AJAX methodology better than Flash, whereas online tools to manipulate graphics, video and other rich media will, I suspect, remain in the zone where Flash is ‘king’. Since Flash was always intended to be a way to bring a richer media experience to the web, wheres the purpose of Ajax is to increase the efficiency of a web page’s interaction with the server, this is a perfectly natural diversification.
This also leads to a very simple answer to your last question, ‘which would you use’. The answer, I think, should be both, where appropriate. As with any web development project, pick the best tool for each functionality requirement and integrate them where required.
I also think that it’s very important to diffrentiate between AJAX, which is a mthod for interacting with a server, and DHTML / Javascript, which are used to improve the user experience (we hope!
). It’s the combination of the two that enables us to make really engaging UIs without Flash.
Silverlight!
I think the tool that is most understood by the developer is the likely winner for that web site.
AJAX may be more universal - for full apps as well as snippets, utilities, and fill-in functions. Flash, I think, is most often too bloated for less than a full application - such as a game, or a desktop program replacement.
Cake or death?
Ajax with will be the movement of open source I believe with Silverlight taking up the proprietary Banner.
Silverlight = Flash plus Ajax in my opinion!
As already mentioned Flash for fluid graphical interaction and Ajax for fluid data interaction.
Eitherways its great to have choice!
I would defiantly say AJAX, because it is a lot more assessable than flash. And I dare say if SVG ever gets standardly implemented across all major platforms flash will become obsolete, but I think Microsoft is currently more concerned about getting developers to adopt Silverlight, than implementing SVG in Internet Explorer.
It’s not a mutually exclusive question, save where a given application is concerned. Flash totally owns Ajax where visual presentation is concerned.
Where Ajax offers some nice tools for data interaction, that doesn’t necessarily rule out flash either. Ajax was originally a workaround to get interactivity without reloading a page and thereby conserving bandwidth.
There’s no reason an Ajax app couldn’t INTERACT with flash via Javascript for data connectivity, although Flash itself is no slouch either. XML data connectors and other features give it plenty of room to move too. I don’t think either one will dominate unless browsers pick up the slack between the two, such as dynamic fonts, animated graphics etc.
I personally like both, but I always feel I am requiring someone to download something so that my webpage can be viewed in flash. But I also experience conflicts between Ajax elements on the same page, which I don’t get with anything flash. I have even seen it work differently with different browsers. I just wish someone could come up with something that will allow me to give some effect to content without having to have something installed on each computer. Don’t see that happening though.
Although far superior, try winning a NASCAR race using an Indy car…
How many of us thought that ColdFusion would be dead by now. And, as far as that goes, asp.net, with PHP being the most popular server technology. Yet, CFM and ASP.net and even ASP are still alive and doing well.
Web sites accomplish many things. There is a need for many tools. Comparing AJAX to Flash is like comparing Indy to NASCAR.
Taking it from a Project Manager’s view (and, not a developer) I am going to look at the needs of the application and determine, by these needs, what tools I am going to use.
my pennies
~Chip
Three reasons not to use Flash: it sucks up bandwidth, it requires a plugin (anathema to good user experience), and it distracts the viewer (which is why advertisers like it).
When I encounter a business’ site that requires Flash and has a gatekeeper home page that requires a click-through to get to where you wanted to go in the first place, I go somewhere else, and I assume that the company’s marketing people and Web developers are clueless.
Until something better comes around, Flash will probably always be used for interactive web advertisements.
I use Flex (Flash) and really think it’s the type of thing of the future. (Whether Silverlight, JavaFX, etc.) It’s just too good. I do agree that it is currently better suited to certain industries. For a good Flex example go to NASA.gov.
But I have to just say in response to CJ, that he is right about Coldfusion’s longevity but if Adobe doesn’t bring the price down, I think it will diminish. It’s not the value it once was because Adobe is pushing Flex front ends now instead of Coldfusion front ends.
At least AJAX can be unobtrusive and be made to degrade gracefully so that even web crawlers can find their way around. I am thinking about search engine and webbot friendly sites. How often do you see a site using predominantly flash get a high ranking?
That I (will be fixed). We’re not all the way their yet but that day will come. I personally believe Sun will eventually give up JavaFX because they just have too hard a mountain to climb and they arean’t in a very good financial position. Microsoft is Microsoft wo it will probably get down to Adobe and Microsoft. Choose your poison.
I would like to see both of them banned from use on web sites. In my situation (which is not likely to change any-time soon) I am stuck with a dial-up connection to the Internet so both of these are very, very annoying to me. For GOD sake if you want to see moving pictures go rent a movie, but keep it off the internet!