AJAX and the hidden cost of ease of use
The IT industry - always a seething den of buzzword bingo - appears to be in complete overdrive at the moment. Based on a back-of-an-envelope calculation, I believe I have had to internalize an average of 1.5 new buzzwords every working day this week.
Many of today's trendy buzzwords are Web related. This is not surprising. What I do find surprising is the extent to which modern buzzwords sound as if they were dreamt up in some high powered brainstorming session over in the marketing department.
Gone are the days of staid, acronymical buzzwords like HTTP or CSS. In are the days of punchy forget-me-not buzzwords like mashups and AJAX and Flash-enabled. Is it just me or does the current buzzword melange sound like it was inspired by a foodfight in a kitchen? All that mashing up going on before the AJAX[1] and the Flash[2] get to work cleaning things up...?
One thing is certain. A lot of the buzzwording going on surrounds improving the user experience on the Web. This sounds very laudable. How could anyone be concerned by such a thing? Are you worried? Probably not. Am I worried? Yes. A little.
Here is how I see it. Making an application easier to use almost always means making better use of the users ability to see; to hear; to click buttons; to access drop down menus and so on. Unfortunately, computers themselves cannot see or hear. This results in a most unfortunate inverse relationship. Namely, the more visual and interactive and compelling an application is from a user interface perspective, the harder it is to make said application do its thing without human intervention.
There is a pattern here. You could almost put it to music. In order to make end users want to use your application, it is necessary to make it visual and interactive. If you are successful, users get to the point where they want to hook up your application with some other application - to integrate them together. At this point, you are probably in trouble. The more successful you have been with your graphical user interface and user interaction, the harder it is likely to be to integrate your application with some other application.
A common buzzword in the industry is the concept of a "front end". In an ideal world, the front end just handles all the graphical user interface stuff while the back end does all the real work. In this ideal world, you can just bypass the front end and work with the back end directly when you want to integrate applications. Sadly, we do not live in this ideal world.
Sign up for ITworld's Daily newsletter
Follow ITworld on Twitter @IT_world
Esther Schindler
If the comments are ugly, the code is ugly
claird
SVG a graphics format for 21st century
pasmith
Take Chrome OS for a test spin
Sandra Henry-Stocker
Solaris Tip: Have Your Files Changed Since Installation?
jfruh
Android fragments vs. the iPhone monolith
mikelgan
What Gizmodo missed about the Pro WX Wireless USB disk drive
Sidekick: The Good News & the Bad News
Either way you look at it Microsoft Data Center management did not follow standards or best practices in this failure. In which case it makes me wonder more about the outsourcing of corporate data much less personal data.
- mburton325
Join the conversation here
Quick, practical advice for IT pros. Made fresh daily.
Want to cash in on your IT savvy? Send your tip to tips@itworld.com. If we post it, we'll send you a $25 Amazon e-gift card.













