a moan about ajax lol

[redarrow]

Hi there all,

 

I have been looking around at all the new trends on the internet to keep up, before i open a web design and programming business to get money.

 

ajax

 

because now everybody relays on ajax, on there screens to show moving objects, i have to learn ajax properly.

 

This is a night mere on it own.

 

 

Because everybody gone mad on hd, i also got to get some skill in hd movie creations.

 

 

i hate JavaScript and i mean it i totally hate it, but because all these web sites using ajax i got to learn it in depth dam java script.

 

 

surly afther all the years off learning php mysql css html others to everybody ajax is a pain to learn surly.

 

 

if you read any job for php they all ask for ajax and now more and more adverts on tv with web sites ajax is a must.

wish this never happen dam java script sorry just hate java script to hard to learn properly.

 

i no i got a cert in java script but i thort il never need it ever back to basics dam java script.

[zq29]

Maybe you should investigate using a framework such as jQuery to implement your JavaScript requirements? It would be a lot easier than learning the core language from scratch, and they have pre-built solutions for easy integration of AJAX techniques.

 

Oh, and you shouldn't be using JavaScript for the sake of using it, use it only when it is really necessary to enhance the user experience.

 

I don't understand why you need to learn how to create HD movies though, surely that's a different sector of business? We normally get any video requirements delivered to us from a third party instructed by the client.

[dreamwest]

I try to avoid javascript too. I have LESS than 5kb of javascript combined on my entire site (one of the reasons it loads so fast)

 

I use ajax http request for everything else, its non intrusive and fun to play with and add lots of value to your apps

[Daniel0]

You try to avoid Javascript, but use AJAX for everything else? You do realize that AJAX is a Javascript technique, right?

[seventheyejosh]

I <3 AJAX , Javascript, & the jQuery Framework. I've never used the jQuery AJAX though, I've been meaning to try it. I'm the php/mysql guy who out of curiosity became the Javascript go-to guy at my company.

 

It really is cool shit.

 

[corbin]

I've never understood everyone's hatred of JavaScript.  Yeah, as a language it has its bad parts, but I don't find it any less pleasant than PHP.

 

 

And as far as learning JavaScript goes, if you already know another programming language (or more specifically you know how to use logic when programming, a skill usually learned while learning the syntax of your first language), it's not difficult to learn at all in my opinion.  The hardest part would be learning how to manipulate the DOM.  (Or maybe browser specific APIs....)

 

And as far as AJAX goes, it's pretty straightforward and simple.

[dreamwest]

You try to avoid Javascript, but use AJAX for everything else? You do realize that AJAX is a Javascript technique, right?

 

Well my ajax request has about 7 lines of javascript and is 1kb in size, and for what it can do thats impressive - pretty much run the entire sites functionality. Also the fact it can query pages without initially including them is great..I LOV IT!

 

You want to see javascript overdone get coppermine.....now only 10MB in size .....for what picture galleries and a slideshow

[KevinM1]

I've never understood everyone's hatred of JavaScript.  Yeah, as a language it has its bad parts, but I don't find it any less pleasant than PHP.

 

 

And as far as learning JavaScript goes, if you already know another programming language (or more specifically you know how to use logic when programming, a skill usually learned while learning the syntax of your first language), it's not difficult to learn at all in my opinion.  The hardest part would be learning how to manipulate the DOM.  (Or maybe browser specific APIs....)

 

And as far as AJAX goes, it's pretty straightforward and simple.

 

I firmly believe that the reason why people hate JavaScript is that they've never learned the proper way to write it.  The vast majority of tutorials I've seen are, in a word, putrid.  A lot of them rely on tricks from the dark ages of Netscape Navigator and IE 4.  Most fail to caution against simple mistakes (problems with scope, runtime errors, etc).  I cringe when I see code that has the JavaScript portion hidden in HTML comments, as it's a sure sign that the coder's headaches stem from reading a dated tutorial.  And, to be fair, I used to be in the same boat until I read Resig's book on the subject.  Now that I know how to structure my scripts, things run a hell of a lot more smoothly.

 

JavaScript is actually pretty nice if you stick to the good parts, use it only to enhance existing functionality, and use a framework like jQuery to smooth over any cross-browser issues.

[corbin]

I've never understood everyone's hatred of JavaScript.  Yeah, as a language it has its bad parts, but I don't find it any less pleasant than PHP.

 

 

And as far as learning JavaScript goes, if you already know another programming language (or more specifically you know how to use logic when programming, a skill usually learned while learning the syntax of your first language), it's not difficult to learn at all in my opinion.  The hardest part would be learning how to manipulate the DOM.  (Or maybe browser specific APIs....)

 

And as far as AJAX goes, it's pretty straightforward and simple.

 

I firmly believe that the reason why people hate JavaScript is that they've never learned the proper way to write it.  The vast majority of tutorials I've seen are, in a word, putrid.  A lot of them rely on tricks from the dark ages of Netscape Navigator and IE 4.  Most fail to caution against simple mistakes (problems with scope, runtime errors, etc).  I cringe when I see code that has the JavaScript portion hidden in HTML comments, as it's a sure sign that the coder's headaches stem from reading a dated tutorial.  And, to be fair, I used to be in the same boat until I read Resig's book on the subject.  Now that I know how to structure my scripts, things run a hell of a lot more smoothly.

 

JavaScript is actually pretty nice if you stick to the good parts, use it only to enhance existing functionality, and use a framework like jQuery to smooth over any cross-browser issues.

 

 

Yeah, I have to agree with you on the crapping-beginnings thing.  I don't hang out in the JS forum often, but I've noticed in the AJAX forum problems are often caused by a bad tutorial suggesting bad practices like using a global variable to store the request or something like that.

 

 

You try to avoid Javascript, but use AJAX for everything else? You do realize that AJAX is a Javascript technique, right?

 

Well my ajax request has about 7 lines of javascript and is 1kb in size, and for what it can do thats impressive - pretty much run the entire sites functionality. Also the fact it can query pages without initially including them is great..I LOV IT!

 

You want to see javascript overdone get coppermine.....now only 10MB in size .....for what picture galleries and a slideshow

 

 

Just of curiosity, does your site function with JS turned off?

[dreamwest]

Just of curiosity, does your site function with JS turned off?

 

Never thought about it....its their fault for not having it on anyway.

 

WHAT IF they dont anyway, whats the alternative??

[RichardRotterdam]

Never thought about it....its their fault for not having it on anyway.

It's probably the developer's fault for not getting it right in the first place.

 

As for learning javascript, if you are already familiar with PHP it shouldn't be too hard learning javascript. PHP and Javascript have many similarities. The thing that can be a pain in the ass is the DOM since it differs among different browsers. Javascript frameworks such as jQuery can make things including manipulating the DOM a lot easier.

[Daniel0]

Just of curiosity, does your site function with JS turned off?

 

Never thought about it....its their fault for not having it on anyway.

 

WHAT IF they dont anyway, whats the alternative??

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unobtrusive_Javascript

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Separation_of_concerns

[akitchin]

I have been looking around at all the new trends on the internet to keep up, before i open a web design and programming business to get money.

 

i think you may want to make english and communication skills a bigger priority than learning the latest and greatest development trends...

[corbin]

Just of curiosity, does your site function with JS turned off?

 

Never thought about it....its their fault for not having it on anyway.

 

WHAT IF they dont anyway, whats the alternative??

 

 

Google indexing doesn't parse JS either.  So basically go to your site with JS disabled, see how well it works, then think of Google indexing it like that....

[dreamwest]

Just of curiosity, does your site function with JS turned off?

 

Never thought about it....its their fault for not having it on anyway.

 

WHAT IF they dont anyway, whats the alternative??

 

 

Google indexing doesn't parse JS either.  So basically go to your site with JS disabled, see how well it works, then think of Google indexing it like that....

 

Yeah tried it just now most of the site is ok, but features like rating, quicklist and onclick dropdowns etc dont do anything.

 

BUT when i came back here with javascript off the "insert quote" link didnt work so every site is most likely designed with javascript on by default.

 

I also checked my logs and less...thats LESS than 1% have javascript turned off.

 

Im going to add a message in the header to tell ppl they need it on to use the fuctionality of the site

[dreamwest]

Ok went to youtube with javascript off, tried to watch a vid and:

 

"Hello, you either have JavaScript turned off or an old version of Adobe's Flash Player. Get the latest Flash player."

 

Also comments and ratings dont work, related images dont display thumbs, thumbchange doesn work in video section the list goes on.

 

Verdict: If they dont care neither do i

[corbin]

Just of curiosity, does your site function with JS turned off?

 

Never thought about it....its their fault for not having it on anyway.

 

WHAT IF they dont anyway, whats the alternative??

 

 

Google indexing doesn't parse JS either.  So basically go to your site with JS disabled, see how well it works, then think of Google indexing it like that....

 

Yeah tried it just now most of the site is ok, but features like rating, quicklist and onclick dropdowns etc dont do anything.

 

BUT when i came back here with javascript off the "insert quote" link didnt work so every site is most likely designed with javascript on by default.

 

I also checked my logs and less...thats LESS than 1% have javascript turned off.

 

Im going to add a message in the header to tell ppl they need it on to use the fuctionality of the site

 

 

The quote function isn't exactly necessary to the usability of the site, is it?

 

 

According to some statistics (which are quite old), up to 10% of people have it disabled.  1% is probably more accurate though.

 

 

But still...  Making a site work without JS enabled takes minimal effort... 

 

 

What if the website were a store?  That could mean potentially losing 1-10% of sales.

 

 

What it really comes down to is only using JS that actually adds to the feel of your website.  Then you have to decide whether to support non-JS enabled users, which I usually determine like this:

 

-Is it even possible for the site to function without JS.  (Think facebook...  I just can't imagine facebook without JS.)

-(This one has never applied to any site I've made)  Is the site big enough that people will be willing to turn JS on for it?  For example, if facebook.com says "Yo, you need JavaScript, dog" ('cause facebook messages have that dialect) people will figure out how to turn JS on and they will do it.  If corbinisanawesomesexybeast.com says "Please turn JS on" people will most likely just leave.

-Is making the site non-JS-enabled friendly worth the time?  If you really don't care about the 1% of users who don't have it, and it would take more than like 10 minutes to do, then hey, maybe it's not worth the time.

 

 

Ok went to youtube with javascript off, tried to watch a vid and:

 

"Hello, you either have JavaScript turned off or an old version of Adobe's Flash Player. Get the latest Flash player."

 

Also comments and ratings dont work, related images dont display thumbs, thumbchange doesn work in video section the list goes on.

 

Verdict: If they dont care neither do i

 

Hate to tell you this, but you aren't youtube.

 

Two points:

 

-Can you index a Flash video?  Do they want to index the asinine comments retarded 30 year olds make all day?

-Somethings are indexed.  Like video titles and descriptions, user pages (the non-graphic parts).

 

And a third point that I can't prove:

-Google owns youtube.  If google really wanted to let people search the crap out of it, why not just directly read the youtube database and index it that way.

 

 

 

 

 

 

What I really was getting at with my JS paranoia is that sites that use AJAX for every damn link just go overboard.  What does that add to the site?  Most users won't even notice anything.  Even if that were to be done, it takes about 30 seconds to make it work without JS.

[Philip]

Ok went to youtube with javascript off, tried to watch a vid and:

 

"Hello, you either have JavaScript turned off or an old version of Adobe's Flash Player. Get the latest Flash player."

 

Also comments and ratings dont work, related images dont display thumbs, thumbchange doesn work in video section the list goes on.

 

Verdict: If they dont care neither do i

 

I've been watching this thread, and now I'm going to jump in. Just because one person (in this case, a large corporation) does something, doesn't automatically mean you should do the same. It seems like a lot of people just look to see what the big whigs do and think its what they should, but that disregards innovation, knowing your audience, hell even best practices. Innovation, if you're copying what they big sites do, what is going to make you stand out? Knowing your audience, if you know that all you users are going to have X browser with X settings (such as an intranet setting), then sure you can design/program for that one browser. Otherwise, you should always be prepared for things to break with different settings (such as JS turned off, or non-existent.) Best coding practices, see point before.

 

Take a look at another one of Google's prized babies: GMail. You have the rich experience with JS, and then you have the option to load a Basic HTML version, where you can access it on slower connections, or if you don't have a capable browser.

 

Seriously, here's an example: I visit your site on a netbook with a slow wireless connection. Sometimes I'll turn off JS because a lot sites have craploads of unneeded JS to save loading time. If I came to your site with JS disabled, and nothing worked, I doubt I'd go back. In all seriousness, first impression for me is everything, and if your site doesn't do shit, why should I waste my time and come back later?

 

As said before, JS is meant to enhance the user's experience.

 

Sorry if I started rambling, I'm tired, haha

[redarrow]

The problem is just learning ajax as ajax is not good enough in my opinion, like said if you don't add ajax/JavaScript properly your end up with all browser compatibility problems.

 

surly real programmers out there don't just rely on 3rd party add'ons.

 

anyway i ordered 3 new books to learn properly.

 

and i deeply recommend if you don't use ajax currently then learn it now as it going

to be more heavily used as time goes on for user interactivity.

 

if you only offer your customer plain html/css php eventually you wont get customers.

 

you got to think out off the box to go froward into todays climate.

 

no new business want crap plain web sites or no user interactivity,

 

also hd getting really big now(( why pay someone to do the art work, or films, do them your self. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Daniel0]

why pay someone to do the art work, or films, do them your self.

 

Sorry, but that argument sucks. Why buy meat from the supermarket when you can breed cows and slaughter them yourself? Why buy cars when you can take an engineering degree and make them yourself? Why take engineering degrees when you can read books yourself and read? Why buy books when you can experiment and come to the same results yourself?

 

The problem with that mindset is that you enter an infinite loop. When are you going to stop? When will it be okay to rely on other people's services?

 

Moreover, instead of being really good at one thing or a couple of things, you'll end up being average or mediocre at a lot of things. Hypothetically, let's say you have cancer. Which person would you like to treat you? The doctor who knows something about virtually all branches of medicine, but has no particular specialty, or the doctor who has chosen to specialize in cancer, but whose knowledge is lacking in other areas of medicine?

 

The point of that example is of course that the people who have specialized in creating HD artwork/movies will almost surely create something significantly better than you will.

 

Pick an area you like and want to be good at instead of picking 15 areas to be mediocre at. You constantly come up with some new thing you want to master, but I'm sorry to say it, but you will never master something unless you focus on that particular thing.

 

You have a finite amount of time available, so the more things you wish to learn the less time there will be for each of these things.

 

It also seems you're oblivious to the way virtually the entire world works. Person A has skills x and y, so these are the services he can offer for other people. However, he doesn't know how to do z and q (and a lot of other things), so he has to get other people to do that for him. Person B is good at q, so he can do it for person A (for some sort of compensation (either money or a favor)). If you're trying to subvert that system you're up for a really tough task.

[corbin]

I used to have the same mindset.  I didn't like using frameworks or libraries or anything since they weren't mine.  But now I've gotten over that.  For example, I <3 jQuery now.

[KevinM1]

I used to have the same mindset.  I didn't like using frameworks or libraries or anything since they weren't mine.  But now I've gotten over that.  For example, I <3 jQuery now.

 

I think it's a phase all young coders go through.  I was the same way, too.

[corbin]

I think at first everyone views it as something to be shameful of.  Like somehow it says that I'm a bad coder because I don't code everything my self.  Then I realized that it was stupid to not use premade stuff if it was equal or better quality than what I would write since it would take me many, many hours to make some stuff from scratch.

[KevinM1]

I think at first everyone views it as something to be shameful of.  Like somehow it says that I'm a bad coder because I don't code everything my self.  Then I realized that it was stupid to not use premade stuff if it was equal or better quality than what I would write since it would take me many, many hours to make some stuff from scratch.

 

Yeah, it tends to stem from a mix of pride ("I'm not a real coder unless I roll my own") and distrust of third party solutions.  At least, it did in my case.

[corbin]

Yeah, exact same for me.

 

 

Like you said, I think it's a phase we all go through.  And I think another part of it was lack of understanding of the paid-developer seen.  I had this fear that one day when I actually did stuff for money clients wouldn't approve of 3rd party scripts.  Then I realized that for the most part that's incorrect.