In-Depth ajaxWrite Review 112
mikemuch writes "ajaxWrite is the first offspring of ajax13, Michael Robertson's (of Lindows and SIPphone fame) latest startup that aims to deliver a brave new line of web-delivered, AJAX-based apps. ExtremeTech today has an in-depth review of just how apt a replacement ajaxWrite is for the big installed word processors. It's a neat idea, but let's just say the web-based word processor has some catching up to do."
Interesting (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Interesting (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Interesting (Score:1)
Re:Interesting (Score:2)
Re:Interesting (Score:2)
Re:Interesting (Score:1)
About ten years ago: "I find these new Java applications, or `applets', to be very interesting."
Didn't we already go down this road and decide that it sucked?
Re:Interesting (Score:5, Informative)
Sort-of like the relationship between "javascript" and "java", only more tenuous (at least both of those were programming languages).
Re:Interesting (Score:3, Interesting)
Said it before, and I'll say it again (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Said it before, and I'll say it again (Score:2)
Re:Said it before, and I'll say it again (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Said it before, and I'll say it again (Score:2)
Re:Said it before, and I'll say it again (Score:2)
Re:Said it before, and I'll say it again (Score:2)
Re:Said it before, and I'll say it again (Score:1)
Wordpad (Score:1)
Re:Said it before, and I'll say it again (Score:3, Interesting)
I went to the site and played with it for 5 minutes. Nothing special. But what realy is a word procesor anyways. We confuse page layout with word processing. You want tables, graphs, pictures, mail merge, fine, but is theally a WP? For the features presented, I found them rather impressive. Okay, I use vim for most my coding. I have been using Pages
Re:Said it before, and I'll say it again (Score:2)
Re:Said it before, and I'll say it again (Score:2)
Re:Said it before, and I'll say it again (Score:1, Insightful)
Precisely. Just as cars are extremely useful, even though they aren't as tough as tanks and can't carry as many people as a bus.
Word processors are designed primarily for correspondence and business use. They don't do complex page layo
Re:Said it before, and I'll say it again (Score:3, Insightful)
I see some really good uses for it actually. I simply used the thesis example not to say I'd trust doing it, but that as for the stylistic needs, it could be done.
Re:Said it before, and I'll say it again (Score:2, Informative)
I think that is invalid argumentation. You dislike AJAX apps, for some reason (why not state it), and then you use this argument. It seems kinda silly.
Even richest-off-all Microsoft, with their follow-don't-lead attitude, do it in versions. We all know how they do it since Word 1.0, Windows 3.0, Internet Explorer 3.0 (breaking-point versions) and need I go on? Would you like to judge the inherent potential of their next phased product line base
Re:Said it before, and I'll say it again (Score:1)
Please Just Stop (Score:4, Insightful)
That's what AJAX is - scientific papers posing as layouts posing as interactive applications. It's bad software practice, a misuse of technology, and an excuse for people to attempt to use limited skills to try to hack a simulated client side application, but one that is fundamentally asynchronous, difficult to debug, never provably functional (what browser are you using?) and just plain, well, bad.
Alright, enough ranting. Mod me down if you want, but when AJAX and "Web 2.0" crashes and burns, you heard it here, well, not first because I'm not the only one to say it, but, well, you heard it, okay? You are, of course, free to do whatever you wish with your time, but please just stop architecting applications like this. I want real applications, not browser-junior app... let... things.
Re:Please Just Stop (Score:3, Insightful)
Its funny because this was the idea with java all along and it crashed and burned 10 years ago. Of course Java was killed by Microsoft introducing a non-standard implementation on IE. Maybe the will do it again with javascript. OTH maybe Firefox will undercut microsoft and introduce a standard client. Perhaps it is time for people to consider (mostly) firefox s
Re:Please Just Stop (Score:3, Interesting)
Oh, please. You could write a standard Java app for IE if you wanted to. The problem was that Java-in-the-browser SUCKED. It was slow, it was an UNBELIEVABLE memory hog, and the widgets looked absolutely amateurish and awful. In fact, computers are faster, but the widgets STILL look awful (and it's still arguably a memory pig, though the proportion is smaller since we have more memory to throw around).
The other proble
Re:Please Just Stop (Score:1)
I do agree, though, that it's a bit silly to have all these fancy multi-gigahertz dual-core processors, with gigs of RAM and even more gigs of HD space, and all they do is fire up web browsers. (Also silly is hearing these Web 2.0 people go bonkers when they finally manage to -- almost! as long as you're using Browser X or Y! and you
Re:Please Just Stop (Score:4, Funny)
Strange, I thought walking upright was one of the things that made us 'human', they didn't call our ancestors homo erectus for nothing...atleast I hope it was the upright walking they were referring too.
Re:Please Just Stop - I agree (Score:2)
AJAX is a hack of a hack... but in this world without standards, innovation must find a way. If anything, the current infatuation with client side scripting should be a great signals to our standards bodies to get off their duffs and work to approve new protocols in a timely fas
Re:Please Just Stop - I agree (Score:1, Informative)
Mozilla and Firefox are both written with massive amounts of javascript/xul
if its good enough for them.....
XUL (Score:1)
Mozilla and Firefox are both written with massive amounts of javascript/xul if its good enough for them.....
So are Thunderbird extensions but after I've written my first and probably last extension (http://wyoguide.sf.net/test/folderselect.xpi [sf.net]), I'm happy to go back to C++.
O. Wyss
Re:Please Just Stop - I agree (Score:1)
While I will not say that javascript is perfect, it is much better than your snide comment makes it seem.
It has functions that are nothing more than a mutable datatype. The dot syntax is just a shorthand into an array of objects on the current object, which can seem peculiar, but works fantastically when you come across the odd need for it. And there are few languages that offer anything near the ease and flexibility of its lambda functions. They're sheer brilliant.
Re:Please Just Stop (Score:5, Insightful)
This is a good thing. Where would we be today if people didn't get technology that was originally developed for one purpose and make it do things that the original creators never envisaged...
That burrito you just whacked in the microwave to heat up? We wouldn't have microwave ovens if it wasn't for someone hacking military radar technology to heat food.
This intraweb thing you're reading at the moment - tell me you're not really glad that it's not another boring scientific document you're reading. That's why you're here at
There's nothing wrong with taking one technology, or in the case of AJAX, a combination of technologies and taking them places that we never dreamed possible.
Re:Please Just Stop (Score:1, Interesting)
The problem is that it's not just taking existing technologies. It's taking a non-standard proprietary extention to javascript, and adding it to the existing technologies. If it used real javascript, it'd be great. Yes, I'm a standards nazi.
Re:Please Just Stop (Score:2)
If what you get at the end is stable, efficient technology that solves a problem and solves it well, then yes, it's a good thing. Otherwise, it's just a curiosity, which is all very well from an R&D viewpoint, but it doesn't help me get my everyday work done.
The grandparent's point seems to be that the industry is doing what it's done many times before: adopting a particular novel technology as a universal solution. To use your analogy, it would be as if somebody came along and said, "Well, you've got
Re:Please Just Stop (Score:1)
Re:Please Just Stop (Score:2)
Re:Please Just Stop (Score:3, Informative)
You used AJAX in the way it was 'meant' to be used - as a compliment to existing web functionality.
Now go write a spreadsheet program that competes with Excel, but do it in Javascript and we'll see what you'll make of Ajax then.
(BTW, ajaxWrite is really a XUL a
Re:Please Just Stop (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Please Just Stop (Score:1)
Re:Please Just Stop (Score:1)
Very interesting. Keep up the good work. BTW, it currently fails under Safari. Everything's undefined.
Re:Please Just Stop (Score:1)
Re:Please Just Stop (Score:1)
It looks like it will be quite useful. When you get a little further along I'd like to start working with it.
Re:Please Just Stop (Score:1)
Everytime I see a post about how Web 2.0 is going to flop primarily because of the bad architecture of AJAX, I think we might be missing the underlying issue.
What all these AJAX apps are showing us, is that people aren't willing to be tied to a particular computer, when they can access information from anywhere. What people want, and AJAX apps are providing, until a better, distributable, and multiplatform alternative arrives, is access anywhere anytime. AJAX is helping bridge the gap between the current a
Re:Please Just Stop (Score:2)
Re:worst name ever (Score:2)
Not sure why you got a troll mod when you're spot on. Calling this AJAXwrite is like calling Linux JavaOS.
Re:worst name ever (Score:1)
AJAX Apps Will Never Replace the Real Thing (Score:5, Interesting)
AJAX abuse (Score:1)
Re:AJAX Apps Will Never Replace the Real Thing (Score:2)
Ajax apps will never replace the real thing? Tell that to everybody using webmail as their mail client. Hell, you don't even need Ajax to displace "the real thing", people have been using Hotmail and others as their mail client for years before Ajax became all the rage.
There's no reason to assume a dropped connection means anything. HTTP is a stateless protocol, simply reconnect and carry on using it.
Re:AJAX Apps Will Never Replace the Real Thing (Score:3, Interesting)
Our users were initially concerned - as you are - about losing docs, so we wrote a component that allows periodic backup saves to your hard disk. But it's seldom used - a good percentage of people don't even have it installed. People's net connections just don't die that often.
The one feature people missed was
The new office paradigm (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:The new office paradigm (Score:3, Informative)
Meet the future: IBM Workplace [ibm.com]
It allows you to collaborate via the web on both Office *and* OpenOffice documents, with full IM capabilities built-in. Integrate it with Lotus Sametime [ibm.com] and you get a full web conferencing suite: voice (including SIP), video, whiteboarding, etc...
Really some very cool technology. And as you can see from my sig, I can even help you with implementing such a project! :)
Re:The new office paradigm (Score:1)
Re:The new office paradigm (Score:2)
Since when does XUL == AJAX? (Score:1)
Re:Since when does XUL == AJAX? (Score:2)
Re:Not Likely (Score:2)
Re:Not Likely (Score:2)
So now Windows users... (Score:3, Insightful)
Brilliant!
Re:So now Windows users... (Score:2, Interesting)
Online programs that I would be willing to use. (Score:2, Interesting)
This Company is Screwed (Score:5, Insightful)
Who is the target audience? (Score:3, Insightful)
Who is the target market user for this -- people who think Windows Write is just too convenient? Someone whose 486 didn't come with a Turbo button, so all their old text editing programs just run too fast?
It has all the features of Windows Write or Apple Textedit, with the stability and performance of a web browser! It's annoying enough to type out a response in a text field and have it get eaten by a network error or page refresh problem or browser crash -- do we really need to start losing entire documents?
ajaxWrite has nothing to do with AJAX. It's XUL. (Score:1, Interesting)
For christ's sake...what's next...ajaxIceCream ?
Re:ajaxWrite has nothing to do with AJAX. It's XUL (Score:2)
Re:ajaxWrite has nothing to do with AJAX. It's XUL (Score:1)
i don't get it (Score:1)
Would this applicaton not have been better as a java applet?
Re:i don't get it (Score:1)
Re:i don't get it (Score:1)
Ha! If only Java were anywhere near standard across browsers. Unless you want to force users to download the latest Java Plugin before running your applet (a long and annoying procedure)
I sure would - a one time download of 20megs isn't too bad.
For one reason or another, Java never really had a fair shot to develop and take-off..too bad.
Now, JavaScript, in itself, isn't messy. You've probably seen a lot of messy JavaScript, but that's because there are a lot of messy JS coders out there.
Don't get me wrong j
Re:i don't get it (Score:1)
1.1 may be bad, but its not quite that bad. The new event model was introduced in 1.1, and 1.0 was never mainstream so isn't worth worrying about. While it might be easier to implement things like accessibility and internationalisation in Java 2, the basic functionality should never require more than 1.1 unless you insist on using Swing.
Most OEMs will bundle Sun's latest JRE with Windows XP these days, so the f
Isn't AjaxWriter just a XUL application now? (Score:2)
I think that useful XUL applications are a good thing, if that's what it is.
This isn't AJAX. (Score:5, Funny)
Re:This isn't AJAX. (Score:2)
Re:This isn't AJAX. (Score:1)
Man, does that app suck great steaming tourdes... (Score:2)
So I type something, select it and try to change the font.
What happens? Nada. It still looks like TimesRoman.
Brilliant!
I can change the size of the font, but I can't change the appearance. Arf.
Import pictur
It saved my friends bacon (Score:3, Insightful)
But if you're stuck somewhere with an internet connection and Microsoft Word files to edit but no word processor, ajaxWrite might save your tail.
My friend emailed himself a document at his work which he saved in OpenDocument format only to find he could not open it in Word. ajaxWrite saved him from making a 1 hour round trip home to get it converted. It may not be Word but it does have its uses.
Re:It saved my friends bacon (Score:1)
Max
Re:It saved my friends bacon (Score:2)
Re:It saved my friends bacon (Score:2)
Re:It saved my friends bacon (Score:2)
One trick pony? (Score:2)
like working on any browser, of my choice?
Re:One trick pony? (Score:2)
All the real work is in the browser itself, no? (Score:2)
As far as I know, they aren't actually doing word processing in AJAX, ie. when you type a letter, it isn't modifying the DOM. It's just a Firefox/Mozilla HTML edit control, with a small user interface around it to choose fonts, etc.
This is exactly the same as developers who create a "Browser" by taking MSHTML control and putting a new menu and toolbar. They do perhaps 1% of the work, and the existing library object does the remaining 99% of understanding how to parse and layout
its better than Writely (Score:1)
Re:its better than Writely (Score:1)
Better than Writely? (Score:1)
Writely has
And it's still in beta.
The only thing ajaxWrite currently has over Writely is that Writely is so popular they had to stop the open beta, so the general public can't use it.
Oh and it has "Ajax" in the name fo
Firefox only (Score:1)
The main page showed me a link where i could download firefox.
If i can download something of that size, and if i have sufficient privileges to install such software, i'll just install a proper text editor.
For an alternative take on word processing... (Score:2, Interesting)
One big document is not always how writers work. That's not how I work, that's not how I think. I like to write lots of different fragments, rearrange them, and then piece them all together later.
I use AJAX sticky notes at http://www.protopage.com/ [protopage.com] as my word processor.
It doesn't look like a word processor - but then the decades old definition of a word processor I think needs to be updated.
This shows the future of abuse (Score:2)
If this AJAX app can do all that to the browser, imagine what could be done in the hands of a spammer. I totally worry about Firefox security, now.
I decided to give it a shot in a totally separate instance of Firefox. But just as a test, I opened a 2nd window in that Firefox process, and a 2nd tab as well. Would they go away? When I click on the button to run ajaxWrite,
something they forgot (Score:2)
Chiapaint, 1996 (Score:2)
If you've tried AjaxWrite--I have--you'll see that most of Bricklin's remarks are still dead on the money. I, for one, waste twenty minutes trying to find a Mac browser that would work with this supposedly cross-platform applicatio
Re:Chiapaint, 1996 (Score:2)
For the record, I have the feeling that if AjaxWrite were a great word processor then people would be using it instead of reviewing it. And it's XUL, not ajax.
When do we get a real UI for the web? (Score:2)
Of course the needs of an app are varied, and even the definition of an "app" can be blurred on the web, but I just can never get over the severe limitations that DHTML imposes o
Versions and security (Score:1)
...why are "Document protection" and "Document revisions" such an important things, as the review says, in Word?
I've used the revision feature of OpenOffice.org and the end result is not pretty. What I end up with is a gigantic work file, with a rather limited functionality in revision comments and a rather silly end result with revision differences view. One look at that and I already got the distinct deep-rooted belief in my head that it will never work, and while I've not used Word's version of this, i