Title: Page 128 – Alex Kirk

---

 * 
   ## 󠀁[Office Web Apps are just Proof-of-Concepts](https://alex.kirk.at/2005/10/08/office-web-apps-are-just-proof-of-concepts/)󠁿
   
 * October 8, 2005
 * AJAX applications are far from replacing desktop office apps. So is Flash by 
   the way.
 * [Several projects](http://blogs.zdnet.com/web2explorer/index.php?p=20) are trying
   to prove the opposite. I still think that it will not happen.
 * The current development is only a rise of quite sophisticated JavaScript applications.
   We had such applications before but now it’s “in” or rather acceptable to use
   JavaScript extensively. No. It seems to be a must to use JavaScript in new applications
   now.
 * I’ve created JS based applications back in 1997 when I couldn’t afford web space
   with server side scripting. As soon as I started working with PHP I gave it up
   because servers were clearly faster at generating pages than browsers at interpreting
   JavaScript.
 * Rich interfaces were left to Flash at that time. As the Flash Player resides 
   in the browser as a plug-in and operates as a natively compiled program for the
   platform it is run on, it provides more speed and is not only fairly dependent
   on browser restrictions. Additionally it is optimized for multimedia operation
   which made it first choice for complex navigation.
 * Browsers (or rather the PCs) are now fast enough to support JavaScript apps. 
   And XmlHttpRequest of AJAX has provided the kick-off. We are now seeing rich 
   interfaces done in JavaScript with the possibility of real time server communication
   for failure fallback.
 * There are a few points that keep AJAX apps from taking over. They mainly go together
   with arguments against Flash.
    - **We are still caught in a browser.** Ordinary web apps sit — by definition,
      of course — in a web browser. There are no means for accessing the local storage—
      which is initially a good thing. But when it comes to web apps you need to
      do all this up- and downloading to use these apps. Or you store everything
      at their server.
    - **We are still caught in a browser.** This is also a problem of user interface.“
      Normal” users have slowly adopted a different way of using interfaces when
      surfing inside a browser (single click vs. double click). With new interfaces
      we challenge them to start using web apps in another way once again. We should
      think about that thoroughly.
    - **Web apps want your data.** (see [What is Web 2.0 by Tim O’Reilly](http://www.oreillynet.com/pub/a/oreilly/tim/news/2005/09/30/what-is-web-20.html?page=5))
      When using web applications you need to trust that app **and** give them all
      your data. Also for security reasons there is no chance to properly store 
      the data on the client side. But even if there was, the web app would already
      have all your data anyway — as it needs it for processing it.
    - **Running complex apps in JavaScript is a waste of CPU power.** Our computers
      have become faster, that’s true. But I don’t think it’s a good idea to use
      the speed for having a browser execute an app in JavaScript when we have stronger
      equivalents on our desktop.
    - **Flash is a plugin.** On the one hand it’s a good thing. We have more CPU
      power. On the other hand it just does not feel right. I cannot use the browser’s
      find function. Brr.
 * For these reasons I stick to my opinion that most of the web based office apps
   we see now are just a proof of concept. In near future they will not replace 
   real office apps.
 * We also need to find methods to be able to effectively share data with our desktop
   computer. The current solutions I know are far from usable and prevent any ordinary
   user from getting into such projects.
 * All in all I am far from being against AJAX apps. But we need to keep the focus
   on apps where the technique can be applied in a useful way. I see them in the
   fields of collaboration and communication.
 * office, apps, ajax, flash, web2.0
 * [Web](https://alex.kirk.at/category/web/)
 * 
   ## 󠀁[Code downloading with AJAX](https://alex.kirk.at/2005/10/05/code-downloading-with-ajax/)󠁿
   
 * October 5, 2005
 * Earlier, I suggested to use Code Downloading in order to reduce the size of AJAX
   application. I left the term undescribed, but I will change this now:
 * As JavaScript is an interpreted language, it is quite easy to load additional
   code, even after the application has “started”. This means that only code absolutely
   necessary to display the app has to be loaded initially.
 * In the following example, we define a function test() in the context of an object
   App. Then via Ajax the original code is overwritten. Naturally also new functions
   can be loaded.
    `
 * The downloaded code is eval’uated, i.e. it is executed. You cannot only execute
   statements but also define variables and functions.
    Source of load.js: ` App.test
   = function() { alert("additional code loaded"); }
 * I have set up an [example implementation of this](https://alex.kirk.at/area7/2005/10/05/).
 * This allows more flexibility for larger apps. My “negative” example, [Kiko](http://www.kiko.com/),
   could use this method to enormously reduce the amount of code to be loaded initially.
 * I alse see the possibility to only store encrypted Javascript source code on 
   the server and decrypt it on-the-fly (of course also this would only prevent 
   script kiddies from stealing, but it could challenge some hacker a bit more).
 * ajax, code downloading
 * [Ajax](https://alex.kirk.at/category/code/ajax/)

 [Previous Page](https://alex.kirk.at/page/127/?output_format=md&term_id=1122) [Next Page](https://alex.kirk.at/page/129/?output_format=md&term_id=1122)