Fill The Form Below

Request a call

Request a Quotation

Rich Internet Applications

There are hundreds of criteria for evaluating RIA and AJAX products. So many that it’s easy to lose focus and misjudge priorities. This essay proposes a decision tree that leads through an evaluation process. It asks for the most distinctive requirements and product features in a top-down sequence, discussing the essential differences between technology options.

Figure 1: Decision Tree

The focus is entirely on questions you should answer when evaluating RIA products. There is no assessment of specific products, because the individual features of products tend to obscure fundamental issues. Notice that RIA and AJAX are sometimes used as synonyms. This is not entirely correct: AJAX is short for “Asynchronous JavaScript And XML”, which essentially limits the term to the set of RIA solutions based on JavaScript. I will adhere to this latter definition, although I fully agree with authors who argue that the concepts proposed by AJAX are by no means limited to JavaScript [1].

Simple User Interface?

The first and most important question to ask is whether the user interface (UI) of your application is simple enough for HTML. If the answer is yes, then HTML is your best option because it enables ubiquitous end user access via browser.

Simple enough for HTML means that the UI has modest interactivity requirements. However, if any of the following features improves your UI, you should consider RIA technology:

  • Partial screen updates
  • Asynchronous communication
  • Server push
  • Widgets supporting direct manipulation
  • Multiple coordinated windows
  • Modal dialogs

RIA technology provides rich client capabilities in a web infrastructure. The goal is to combine the advantages of desktop applications with those of web applications. There are three fundamentally different technology options to achieve this: JavaScript, Java, and Flash. Their respective core advantages lead to the next level of the decision tree.

Ubiquity, Industrial Strength, or Fancy Animations?

Figure 2: RIA Technology Subtree

The question that differentiates RIA technology is whether unconditional end user access via browser (ubiquity), industrial strength, or fancy animations are most important. If ubiquity is the answer, a JavaScript/AJAX based solution will be the favorite, because JavaScript is available “out-of-the-box” in every popular browser. If industrial strength characteristics like maintainability, reliability, availability, scalability, performance and security are the top requirements, a Java solution is likely to be the front-runner. Java is unquestionably superior to the scripting alternatives in these areas. Last but not least, if fancy animations are your primary requirement, the attractiveness of Flash may outweigh the arguments speaking for the alternatives. The following sections look closer at these three technology options and present questions you should ask when assessing corresponding products.

Ubiquity: JavaScript/AJAX

Figure 3: JavaScript/AJAX Branch

AJAX is neither a product nor a new technology but a new branding for RIA technology that is based on JavaScript, XML, and other technologies. Since most JavaScript based products have adopted the AJAX terminology, it’s reasonable to put them in a single category. JavaScript/AJAX products are appropriate in situations where the user expects an application to work unconditionally in browsers. When buying a DVD or booking a flight, for instance, nobody will want to install a plug-in.

Plain HTML remains the best solution for simple UI requirements. Yet, DVD stores or travel booking applications with simple UIs are often vexing or even useless. Anyone who has tried to book an itinerary with multiple flights, hotels, and rental cars will agree that current websites are painful to use. JavaScript/AJAX could help here. Unfortunately, there’s only a handful of “killer” applications that show what’s possible: Google Suggest and Google Maps are among them. Cited as the key examples by Jesse James Garrett in his defining article on AJAX [2], they are arguably the most popular JavaScript based RIAs on the web.

Selecting RIA products based on JavaScript/AJAX is challenging. The issue is that JavaScript is hard to deal with. It’s no coincidence that it took the skills and funds of Google to come up with “killer” applications. Internet giants like Amazon or Ebay are not leveraging the potential of JavaScript/AJAX, although the technology has been around for years and would potentially improve their websites substantially. Just imagine how their sites would profit by “search as you type”, scrolling lists, partial screen updates, or browseable category trees.

The following questions will help in deciding whether an RIA product based on JavaScript/AJAX is suitable for your needs.

Browsers and OS supported?

JavaScript implementations are not standardized across browsers and operating systems. This means that programs must be aware of the browser, the operating system, and their respective versions. Programs must execute different code depending on specific combinations thereof, which is a developer’s nightmare. The most essential characteristic of a JavaScript/AJAX product is, therefore, how well it handles these combinations and shields the developer from the complexity of managing them in application code. The combinations supported by the Google applications may serve as a benchmark for evaluation. Google Maps and Google Suggest support:

IE 6.0+ on Windows

Firefox 0.8+ on Windows, Mac, Linux

Safari 1.2.4+ on Mac (Google Suggest 1.2.2 or newer)

Netscape 7.1+ on Windows, Mac, Linux

Mozilla 1.4+ on Windows, Mac, Linux

Opera 8+ on Windows, Mac, Linux (Google Suggest 7.5.4+)

RIA Functions?

JavaScript was designed for scripting rather than full-fledged rich client development. For this reason, a JavaScript/AJAX product may not necessarily support all RIA functions mentioned. Partial screen updates, asynchronous communication, modal dialogs and menus will probably be available. But other RIA goodies may be severely limited in functionality or missing altogether. Typically, the set of rich UI widgets that supports direct manipulation will be poor compared to those we find in toolkits for desktop applications. Important questions to ask include:

how does the widget set compare to standard sets like those of Java Swing?

is the look&feel adaptable?

is there an API for the development of new widgets?

is it possible to integrate third-party widgets?

what is the market for third-party widgets?

is there support for Accessibility?

How Strong?

expand