Comments on: The Problems with ASP.NET AJAX http://francisshanahan.com/index.php/2009/the-problems-with-aspnet-ajax/ Thoughts on technology from a citizen scientist Sat, 04 Sep 2010 10:16:34 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0 By: Brad http://francisshanahan.com/index.php/2009/the-problems-with-aspnet-ajax/comment-page-1/#comment-1524 Brad Mon, 30 Mar 2009 00:33:58 +0000 http://francisshanahan.com/www/?p=1726#comment-1524 I surprised to read 'Atlas' in 3/2009. AFAIK that was the beta name for this stuff that was dropped 2 years ago. UpdatePanels are all about development speed. There is some speed gain in that an entire page is not sent back from the server. but you are still submitting the whole page and the server is processing the whole page. UpdatePanels will continue to have a place for converting existing web applications into more ajaxy types of applications. But if you are building from the ground up it is a mistake to use them. WCF and AspNetCompatibilityRequirements give you a lot of power to make data only calls based on a user. Once the data is back at the browser you can use whatever javascript library you like to modify the DOM. I surprised to read ‘Atlas’ in 3/2009. AFAIK that was the beta name for this stuff that was dropped 2 years ago.

UpdatePanels are all about development speed. There is some speed gain in that an entire page is not sent back from the server. but you are still submitting the whole page and the server is processing the whole page.

UpdatePanels will continue to have a place for converting existing web applications into more ajaxy types of applications.

But if you are building from the ground up it is a mistake to use them. WCF and AspNetCompatibilityRequirements give you a lot of power to make data only calls based on a user. Once the data is back at the browser you can use whatever javascript library you like to modify the DOM.

]]> By: A Better Web Development Stack | Francis Shanahan[.com] http://francisshanahan.com/index.php/2009/the-problems-with-aspnet-ajax/comment-page-1/#comment-1498 A Better Web Development Stack | Francis Shanahan[.com] Sun, 29 Mar 2009 03:51:26 +0000 http://francisshanahan.com/www/?p=1726#comment-1498 [...] time I griped about ASP.NET ATLAS [LINK]. Ok so with that said, what’s the alternative? When I wrote my book (Amazon.com Mashups) I [...] [...] time I griped about ASP.NET ATLAS [LINK]. Ok so with that said, what’s the alternative? When I wrote my book (Amazon.com Mashups) I [...]

]]> By: Alek Davis http://francisshanahan.com/index.php/2009/the-problems-with-aspnet-ajax/comment-page-1/#comment-1020 Alek Davis Thu, 05 Mar 2009 05:44:56 +0000 http://francisshanahan.com/www/?p=1726#comment-1020 There is no such thing as THE perfect web development stack. Whether one development stack is better or worse than another development stack depends on the type of application you're writing, your team's skill sets, and a whole range of other things. Overall, your points are correct, but here are some redeeming thoughts. a) Right, there is not much of the speed gain, but it's not just about speed. With all of their limitations and overhead, update panels can still improve page responsiveness (and usability) by eliminating the flicker effect. b) Right, IDs are verbose, but this is not the update panel issue; if I understand it correctly, it's the general way ASP.NET generates IDs for data-bound controls (they would still be long without update panels). c) I don't know about Scriptaculous, but it's not that hard to reference these IDs from jQuery. d) I'm not sure. With classic ASP/ASP.NET background, it seems rather intuitive to me. e) The fact that you don't have to write any additional APIs looks like an advantage to me: less code, better maintainability (in most cases). f) Okay, maybe it's for lazy developers, but not always. It's a valid option for developers who are just switching from classic ASP.NET to AJAX. It may not be the final option, but could be an intermediate stage. Once developers get more comfortable with AJAX using update panels, they can move to more advanced and effective techniques. It may also be a good upgrade strategy for already built apps that do not use AJAX. There is no such thing as THE perfect web development stack. Whether one development stack is better or worse than another development stack depends on the type of application you’re writing, your team’s skill sets, and a whole range of other things. Overall, your points are correct, but here are some redeeming thoughts.

a) Right, there is not much of the speed gain, but it’s not just about speed. With all of their limitations and overhead, update panels can still improve page responsiveness (and usability) by eliminating the flicker effect.

b) Right, IDs are verbose, but this is not the update panel issue; if I understand it correctly, it’s the general way ASP.NET generates IDs for data-bound controls (they would still be long without update panels).

c) I don’t know about Scriptaculous, but it’s not that hard to reference these IDs from jQuery.

d) I’m not sure. With classic ASP/ASP.NET background, it seems rather intuitive to me.

e) The fact that you don’t have to write any additional APIs looks like an advantage to me: less code, better maintainability (in most cases).

f) Okay, maybe it’s for lazy developers, but not always. It’s a valid option for developers who are just switching from classic ASP.NET to AJAX. It may not be the final option, but could be an intermediate stage. Once developers get more comfortable with AJAX using update panels, they can move to more advanced and effective techniques. It may also be a good upgrade strategy for already built apps that do not use AJAX.

]]>