Web Clients, the role of ASP.NET and the Future of Web Development and Web Standards

Discussion in 'ASP .Net' started by Guadala Harry, Nov 5, 2004.

  1. This inquiry has to do with the client capabilities and Web client
    experience:

    I've been developing rich client apps (Windows desktop client exes in n-tier
    architecture) for over 10 years and am relatively new to Web client
    development. The other day, Kevin Spencer told someone that Web development
    is arguably the most difficult type of programming to do. I couldn't agree
    more. In many ways it seems to me that in order to develop non trivial
    functionality into a Web application, we have to spend a relatively long
    amount of time/effort (relative to achieving similar result in a Windows
    client) - and we have to think very hard about the tradeoffs between
    functionality and performance... e.g., if you want something approaching the
    functionality provided in a Windows client app you suddenly have the
    likelihood of a gigantic ViewState with associated performance issues... and
    that's if you can assume an uplevel browser or even IE in particular. I
    understand that ASP.NET - at the end of the day - simply provides us with
    powerful tools and methodologies with which we can more easily work with the
    existing Web standards (http/html, etc) on the server side. Powerful as
    ASP.NET is, it is tied to the basic request/response model of http as we now
    know it - and that is where the client experience is limited.

    Three Questions:
    1. Is my above assessment of ASP.NET and the role it currently plays
    basically correct?

    2. What are the next major changes we can expect in Internet programming
    during the next 10 years? Do you think we'll still be programming against a
    basic request/response model in which we pretty much send text around the
    Internet? I'm trying to get a grip on where we are in the current paradigm,
    and when it is likely to shift.

    Please note I do understand Web Services and the SOA in general - but that's
    all beyond the client; what I'm primarily interested in is the client
    experience and client capabilities. At the end of the day it doesn't matter
    if your HTML/XHTML/CSS etc comes from Web Service or Web Application - there
    are still huge limitations in the clients as we currently know them.

    Thanks!

    -GH
    Guadala Harry, Nov 5, 2004
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. Guadala Harry

    darrel Guest


    > Three Questions:
    > 1. Is my above assessment of ASP.NET and the role it currently plays
    > basically correct?


    Sure, but that's really true of any web-centric programming/scripting
    language, is it not?

    > 2. What are the next major changes we can expect in Internet programming
    > during the next 10 years?


    Web development or internet programming?

    10 years? That's really impossible to day.

    Short term? Microsoft will wake up, see Firefox kicking it's ass, and get
    IE7 out the door sooner than later...giving us developers a set of browsers
    that are actually more alike than different for once. ;o)

    Mid-term, companies will begin to see the absolute crap that most commercial
    vendors of web-based software product. This is more of a hope than a
    prediction, though. ;o)

    >Do you think we'll still be programming against a
    > basic request/response model in which we pretty much send text around the
    > Internet?


    If you're talking Web, ie HTTP, then yes. If you don't like that, there are
    other protocols that you can use right now if you'd like.

    > Please note I do understand Web Services and the SOA in general - but

    that's
    > all beyond the client; what I'm primarily interested in is the client
    > experience and client capabilities. At the end of the day it doesn't

    matter
    > if your HTML/XHTML/CSS etc comes from Web Service or Web Application -

    there
    > are still huge limitations in the clients as we currently know them.


    What some call limitations, others call the nature of the medium. Yes, there
    are things you can't do with web pages. But the benefits is that it's a more
    universal protocol. A trade off? Sure. But I don't like to think of it as a
    limitation.

    *Note I am not an expert on any of this. All the above IMHO. ;o)

    Good topic, BTW...would love to see other's thoughts on it.

    -Darrel
    darrel, Nov 5, 2004
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. Guadala Harry

    Marina Guest

    As far as I know, MS is really trying to push winforms, particularly
    deplying winforms over the web, instead of traditional asp.net programming.
    They are working on better one click downloading, having the program check
    for updates of itself every time it is launched, etc.

    As far as I know though, they haven't provided any solutions to the
    configuration/security issues that come along with this - i.e. having to
    have each user go through configuring .net security on their machine in
    order for the program to be able to do anything useful.

    The other issue is that it requries the user have the .net framework
    installed, though I think that will become less of an issue as .net will be
    preinstalled everywhere, etc. Although it will definitely be a problem for
    places trying to support people on non Windows machines - so that will be a
    stopping block for many.

    I am not sure how easy it will be to switch to this new approach. I think
    you can do very powerful stuff with the web, and make the interface very
    usable and responsive with the help of client side script. ASP.NET's
    controls are all heavily server side based, and have very little client
    script to make the controls do more work on the client.

    I think only time will tell how willing people are to switching to
    programming their web based apps in winforms, and how willing their clients
    are with dealing with it.

    "Guadala Harry" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > This inquiry has to do with the client capabilities and Web client
    > experience:
    >
    > I've been developing rich client apps (Windows desktop client exes in

    n-tier
    > architecture) for over 10 years and am relatively new to Web client
    > development. The other day, Kevin Spencer told someone that Web

    development
    > is arguably the most difficult type of programming to do. I couldn't agree
    > more. In many ways it seems to me that in order to develop non trivial
    > functionality into a Web application, we have to spend a relatively long
    > amount of time/effort (relative to achieving similar result in a Windows
    > client) - and we have to think very hard about the tradeoffs between
    > functionality and performance... e.g., if you want something approaching

    the
    > functionality provided in a Windows client app you suddenly have the
    > likelihood of a gigantic ViewState with associated performance issues...

    and
    > that's if you can assume an uplevel browser or even IE in particular. I
    > understand that ASP.NET - at the end of the day - simply provides us with
    > powerful tools and methodologies with which we can more easily work with

    the
    > existing Web standards (http/html, etc) on the server side. Powerful as
    > ASP.NET is, it is tied to the basic request/response model of http as we

    now
    > know it - and that is where the client experience is limited.
    >
    > Three Questions:
    > 1. Is my above assessment of ASP.NET and the role it currently plays
    > basically correct?
    >
    > 2. What are the next major changes we can expect in Internet programming
    > during the next 10 years? Do you think we'll still be programming against

    a
    > basic request/response model in which we pretty much send text around the
    > Internet? I'm trying to get a grip on where we are in the current

    paradigm,
    > and when it is likely to shift.
    >
    > Please note I do understand Web Services and the SOA in general - but

    that's
    > all beyond the client; what I'm primarily interested in is the client
    > experience and client capabilities. At the end of the day it doesn't

    matter
    > if your HTML/XHTML/CSS etc comes from Web Service or Web Application -

    there
    > are still huge limitations in the clients as we currently know them.
    >
    > Thanks!
    >
    > -GH
    >
    >
    Marina, Nov 5, 2004
    #3
  4. Guadala Harry

    Scott Allen Guest

    Hi GMan:

    >
    >2. What are the next major changes we can expect in Internet programming
    >during the next 10 years? Do you think we'll still be programming against a
    >basic request/response model in which we pretty much send text around the
    >Internet? I'm trying to get a grip on where we are in the current paradigm,
    >and when it is likely to shift.
    >


    Hopefully in 10 years we will have a client that does more than just
    parse HTML. Saying the browser "just parses HTML" is a bit of an
    exaggeration of course, but relatively speaking, what we have is not
    too far from that behavior. We should be able to push smarter code to
    execute on the client. Smarter than the code that adds a javascript
    alert ('Are you sure you want to delete this record?'); that shows up
    again if the user goes to another page and hits the back button.

    I think the basic request/response model will be around for a long
    time, longer than 10 years. I think having the ability to respond and
    interact with the user in a rich way in between those request/response
    pairs is what we have to get to. A couple technologies will move the
    MS platform in that direction (click once deployment in VS2005,
    Indigo, Longhorn), but I don't know how everyone else gets there, and
    I don't know how those technologies will pan out as yet, either.

    So there is my 1 cent :)

    --
    Scott
    http://www.OdeToCode.com/blogs/scott/
    Scott Allen, Nov 5, 2004
    #4
  5. << What some call limitations, others call the nature of the medium.>>

    I like your benevolent attitude - but in the end if you can't do something,
    you're limited (by definition). Please understand I'm talking about real
    basic things here - like if I want a box that has rounded corners - rather
    than square corners. The "nature of the medium" is that you can't set
    properties on some UI widget and get the arc - rather you have to create a
    graphic image with lines that have the desired curvature (in Photoshop or
    Fireworks, etc), chop up the image into lotsa little images ("gifs") and
    then create links to those images which are in turn embedded into a table or
    placed with CSS etc. You have to copy all of those little images to a very
    specific place on your Web Server and make sure that location makes sense
    relative to all possible pages throughout your app that might re-use those
    images - and then in each place that uses the images make sure that you
    specify the path correctly. That's a lot of work just to get a simple box
    with rounded corners! Oh, and don't move anything later! It'll all break
    unless you go with absolute URLs everywhere which isn't really what you want
    to be doing anyway - or drive the path from a database - but then you have
    performance issues... and on and on it goes.

    This is what I mean by limitations - and the sort of thing that makes me
    think there's gotta be a better way - and that it hopefully won't be too far
    away... thus my OP inquiry to people who may know what's next for Web Client
    application development.

    When I saw the Internet go mainstream in the mid 1990s I decided to avoid it
    as standards were constantly shifting... and that was before the browser
    wars. Then I was glad to be on the sidelines working blissfully in my rich
    Windows environment while the browser wars raged. Now I can't avoid the
    Internet any longer and the good news is that things have stabilized
    considerably since all the rapid changes in the late '90s. But appears to me
    that the Web development community has "stabilized" on on some quite
    limiting technologies and methodologies. Talk about feeling like I'm
    developing in slow motion... The scenario I presented above in a Windows GUI
    app would take a couple of minutes (most of which are spent trying to find
    the dialog box into which to specify the property values); but in a Web app
    it could easily take over an hour to create and fully integrate all the
    required pieces.

    FWIW: I'm NOT being critical or complaining (okay, maybe just a little)....
    just trying to gain some perspective to where we are with the whole Web
    client thing.

    Thanks for your opinion!

    -GH



    "darrel" <> wrote in message
    news:%...
    >
    > > Three Questions:
    > > 1. Is my above assessment of ASP.NET and the role it currently plays
    > > basically correct?

    >
    > Sure, but that's really true of any web-centric programming/scripting
    > language, is it not?
    >
    > > 2. What are the next major changes we can expect in Internet programming
    > > during the next 10 years?

    >
    > Web development or internet programming?
    >
    > 10 years? That's really impossible to day.
    >
    > Short term? Microsoft will wake up, see Firefox kicking it's ass, and get
    > IE7 out the door sooner than later...giving us developers a set of

    browsers
    > that are actually more alike than different for once. ;o)
    >
    > Mid-term, companies will begin to see the absolute crap that most

    commercial
    > vendors of web-based software product. This is more of a hope than a
    > prediction, though. ;o)
    >
    > >Do you think we'll still be programming against a
    > > basic request/response model in which we pretty much send text around

    the
    > > Internet?

    >
    > If you're talking Web, ie HTTP, then yes. If you don't like that, there

    are
    > other protocols that you can use right now if you'd like.
    >
    > > Please note I do understand Web Services and the SOA in general - but

    > that's
    > > all beyond the client; what I'm primarily interested in is the client
    > > experience and client capabilities. At the end of the day it doesn't

    > matter
    > > if your HTML/XHTML/CSS etc comes from Web Service or Web Application -

    > there
    > > are still huge limitations in the clients as we currently know them.

    >
    > What some call limitations, others call the nature of the medium. Yes,

    there
    > are things you can't do with web pages. But the benefits is that it's a

    more
    > universal protocol. A trade off? Sure. But I don't like to think of it as

    a
    > limitation.
    >
    > *Note I am not an expert on any of this. All the above IMHO. ;o)
    >
    > Good topic, BTW...would love to see other's thoughts on it.
    >
    > -Darrel
    >
    >
    Guadala Harry, Nov 5, 2004
    #5
  6. Hi Harry,

    > 1. Is my above assessment of ASP.NET and the role it currently plays
    > basically correct?


    I would say yes.

    > 2. What are the next major changes we can expect in Internet programming
    > during the next 10 years? Do you think we'll still be programming against

    a
    > basic request/response model in which we pretty much send text around the
    > Internet? I'm trying to get a grip on where we are in the current

    paradigm,
    > and when it is likely to shift.


    According to Microsoft, it is "Service Oriented Programming," which is the
    centerpiece of codename "Indigo," which is the distributed application
    architecture being developed for Longhorn, as well as Windows XP and Windows
    Server 2003 (it will be available as an add-on to the .Net platform). It is
    ..Net, but much like C++ is a superset of C, it is a superset of .Net. I
    can't really say much more about it at this point (NDA), but you might want
    to search microsoft.com for whatever information they are making public
    about it.

    --
    HTH,
    Kevin Spencer
    ..Net Developer
    Microsoft MVP
    Neither a follower
    nor a lender be.

    "Guadala Harry" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > This inquiry has to do with the client capabilities and Web client
    > experience:
    >
    > I've been developing rich client apps (Windows desktop client exes in

    n-tier
    > architecture) for over 10 years and am relatively new to Web client
    > development. The other day, Kevin Spencer told someone that Web

    development
    > is arguably the most difficult type of programming to do. I couldn't agree
    > more. In many ways it seems to me that in order to develop non trivial
    > functionality into a Web application, we have to spend a relatively long
    > amount of time/effort (relative to achieving similar result in a Windows
    > client) - and we have to think very hard about the tradeoffs between
    > functionality and performance... e.g., if you want something approaching

    the
    > functionality provided in a Windows client app you suddenly have the
    > likelihood of a gigantic ViewState with associated performance issues...

    and
    > that's if you can assume an uplevel browser or even IE in particular. I
    > understand that ASP.NET - at the end of the day - simply provides us with
    > powerful tools and methodologies with which we can more easily work with

    the
    > existing Web standards (http/html, etc) on the server side. Powerful as
    > ASP.NET is, it is tied to the basic request/response model of http as we

    now
    > know it - and that is where the client experience is limited.
    >
    > Three Questions:
    > 1. Is my above assessment of ASP.NET and the role it currently plays
    > basically correct?
    >
    > 2. What are the next major changes we can expect in Internet programming
    > during the next 10 years? Do you think we'll still be programming against

    a
    > basic request/response model in which we pretty much send text around the
    > Internet? I'm trying to get a grip on where we are in the current

    paradigm,
    > and when it is likely to shift.
    >
    > Please note I do understand Web Services and the SOA in general - but

    that's
    > all beyond the client; what I'm primarily interested in is the client
    > experience and client capabilities. At the end of the day it doesn't

    matter
    > if your HTML/XHTML/CSS etc comes from Web Service or Web Application -

    there
    > are still huge limitations in the clients as we currently know them.
    >
    > Thanks!
    >
    > -GH
    >
    >
    Kevin Spencer, Nov 5, 2004
    #6
  7. Guadala Harry

    darrel Guest

    > I like your benevolent attitude - but in the end if you can't do
    something,
    > you're limited (by definition).


    True. At the point, you pick a different medium.

    > Please understand I'm talking about real
    > basic things here - like if I want a box that has rounded corners - rather
    > than square corners. The "nature of the medium" is that you can't set
    > properties on some UI widget and get the arc - rather you have to create a
    > graphic image with lines that have the desired curvature (in Photoshop or
    > Fireworks, etc), chop up the image into lotsa little images ("gifs") and
    > then create links to those images which are in turn embedded into a table

    or
    > placed with CSS etc.


    Sure. But you want rounded corners, this person wants drop shadows, this
    person wants animated text, this person wants embedded fonts, this person
    wants gamma correction, this person wants sounds, etc.

    Anyways, CSS-3, when it comes along and is actually supported, will get us
    heading in that direction for you.

    > But appears to me
    > that the Web development community has "stabilized" on on some quite
    > limiting technologies and methodologies.


    We had too. MS and the rest weren't really getting along in terms of
    agreeing to work with the same set of standards.

    > Talk about feeling like I'm
    > developing in slow motion... The scenario I presented above in a Windows

    GUI
    > app would take a couple of minutes (most of which are spent trying to find
    > the dialog box into which to specify the property values); but in a Web

    app
    > it could easily take over an hour to create and fully integrate all the
    > required pieces.


    Well, if you're working on a web app, the functionality should be what you
    do first .Then it isn't too much work to add a layer of visual elements. You
    can't 'draw' right on the screen. In some ways, this is the benefit. There
    is a clear separation between the content/functinality and the visual
    rendering. This allows your functionality to be modular in relation to the
    interface elements.

    > FWIW: I'm NOT being critical or complaining (okay, maybe just a

    little)....
    > just trying to gain some perspective to where we are with the whole Web
    > client thing.


    Well, the web client is the browser. The great thing about the web is that
    it's universal. It works on a variety of operating systems, a variety of
    devices, etc. That benefit means the end-user has much more control over
    their environment than you've been able to dictate in the past.

    The big issue that you're facing is that HTML was always meant to be a
    content markup language. It was never designed for visual layout and
    interface design.

    So, we made do, and spent the late 90's and early 00's bastardizing HTML to
    make it do what we wanted as a CLIENT, rather than simply as an information
    markup language.

    Then, we wised up, started looking at CSS, and have slowly built upon that.

    HTML support is finally fairly consistent, but it's the CSS support that is
    lacking. I think you will see things improve once IE7 comes out and Firefox
    starts being a real competitor to MS. It'll mean that the major browsers
    will have to start compteting on how well they support the newer standards,
    vs. how well they support proprietary standards.

    -Darrel
    darrel, Nov 5, 2004
    #7
  8. Hi Harry,

    Are you aware of the hoops you have to jump through to create a Windows
    Forms Control with rounded corners? You literally have to write code that
    paints the entire Control.

    As the old saying goes, "Argue for your limitations and they are yours."
    What some people tend to forget is that all the magic of .Net is simply
    programming code written by Microsoft developers, which you could, if you
    had the time, and the know-how, write for yourself. We developers must not
    be imprisoned by convenience (ready-made code). Anything is possible, given
    the right amount of time and resources.

    --
    HTH,
    Kevin Spencer
    ..Net Developer
    Microsoft MVP
    Neither a follower
    nor a lender be.

    "Guadala Harry" <> wrote in message
    news:#$...
    > << What some call limitations, others call the nature of the medium.>>
    >
    > I like your benevolent attitude - but in the end if you can't do

    something,
    > you're limited (by definition). Please understand I'm talking about real
    > basic things here - like if I want a box that has rounded corners - rather
    > than square corners. The "nature of the medium" is that you can't set
    > properties on some UI widget and get the arc - rather you have to create a
    > graphic image with lines that have the desired curvature (in Photoshop or
    > Fireworks, etc), chop up the image into lotsa little images ("gifs") and
    > then create links to those images which are in turn embedded into a table

    or
    > placed with CSS etc. You have to copy all of those little images to a very
    > specific place on your Web Server and make sure that location makes sense
    > relative to all possible pages throughout your app that might re-use those
    > images - and then in each place that uses the images make sure that you
    > specify the path correctly. That's a lot of work just to get a simple box
    > with rounded corners! Oh, and don't move anything later! It'll all break
    > unless you go with absolute URLs everywhere which isn't really what you

    want
    > to be doing anyway - or drive the path from a database - but then you have
    > performance issues... and on and on it goes.
    >
    > This is what I mean by limitations - and the sort of thing that makes me
    > think there's gotta be a better way - and that it hopefully won't be too

    far
    > away... thus my OP inquiry to people who may know what's next for Web

    Client
    > application development.
    >
    > When I saw the Internet go mainstream in the mid 1990s I decided to avoid

    it
    > as standards were constantly shifting... and that was before the browser
    > wars. Then I was glad to be on the sidelines working blissfully in my rich
    > Windows environment while the browser wars raged. Now I can't avoid the
    > Internet any longer and the good news is that things have stabilized
    > considerably since all the rapid changes in the late '90s. But appears to

    me
    > that the Web development community has "stabilized" on on some quite
    > limiting technologies and methodologies. Talk about feeling like I'm
    > developing in slow motion... The scenario I presented above in a Windows

    GUI
    > app would take a couple of minutes (most of which are spent trying to find
    > the dialog box into which to specify the property values); but in a Web

    app
    > it could easily take over an hour to create and fully integrate all the
    > required pieces.
    >
    > FWIW: I'm NOT being critical or complaining (okay, maybe just a

    little)....
    > just trying to gain some perspective to where we are with the whole Web
    > client thing.
    >
    > Thanks for your opinion!
    >
    > -GH
    >
    >
    >
    > "darrel" <> wrote in message
    > news:%...
    > >
    > > > Three Questions:
    > > > 1. Is my above assessment of ASP.NET and the role it currently plays
    > > > basically correct?

    > >
    > > Sure, but that's really true of any web-centric programming/scripting
    > > language, is it not?
    > >
    > > > 2. What are the next major changes we can expect in Internet

    programming
    > > > during the next 10 years?

    > >
    > > Web development or internet programming?
    > >
    > > 10 years? That's really impossible to day.
    > >
    > > Short term? Microsoft will wake up, see Firefox kicking it's ass, and

    get
    > > IE7 out the door sooner than later...giving us developers a set of

    > browsers
    > > that are actually more alike than different for once. ;o)
    > >
    > > Mid-term, companies will begin to see the absolute crap that most

    > commercial
    > > vendors of web-based software product. This is more of a hope than a
    > > prediction, though. ;o)
    > >
    > > >Do you think we'll still be programming against a
    > > > basic request/response model in which we pretty much send text around

    > the
    > > > Internet?

    > >
    > > If you're talking Web, ie HTTP, then yes. If you don't like that, there

    > are
    > > other protocols that you can use right now if you'd like.
    > >
    > > > Please note I do understand Web Services and the SOA in general - but

    > > that's
    > > > all beyond the client; what I'm primarily interested in is the client
    > > > experience and client capabilities. At the end of the day it doesn't

    > > matter
    > > > if your HTML/XHTML/CSS etc comes from Web Service or Web Application -

    > > there
    > > > are still huge limitations in the clients as we currently know them.

    > >
    > > What some call limitations, others call the nature of the medium. Yes,

    > there
    > > are things you can't do with web pages. But the benefits is that it's a

    > more
    > > universal protocol. A trade off? Sure. But I don't like to think of it

    as
    > a
    > > limitation.
    > >
    > > *Note I am not an expert on any of this. All the above IMHO. ;o)
    > >
    > > Good topic, BTW...would love to see other's thoughts on it.
    > >
    > > -Darrel
    > >
    > >

    >
    >
    Kevin Spencer, Nov 5, 2004
    #8
  9. Guadala Harry

    bruce barker Guest

    1) yes.

    2) there are two trends.

    the Microsoft approach is to use winform apps downloaded from the internet.
    this follows the java applet model, so it may become successful. the biggest
    holdup is clients having the .net vm installed. no current os ships with it,
    a new release is due in 6-8 months. also some proxies block this method.
    also its a windows only solution.

    the w3c group is expanding browser capabilities. xforms is being added,
    along with soap calls from the browser. unfortunately Microsoft's IE appears
    to be a dead product, and none of these features are being added.

    fast networks favor the second model, slow network favor the first.


    -- bruce (sqlwork.com)

    "Guadala Harry" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    | This inquiry has to do with the client capabilities and Web client
    | experience:
    |
    | I've been developing rich client apps (Windows desktop client exes in
    n-tier
    | architecture) for over 10 years and am relatively new to Web client
    | development. The other day, Kevin Spencer told someone that Web
    development
    | is arguably the most difficult type of programming to do. I couldn't agree
    | more. In many ways it seems to me that in order to develop non trivial
    | functionality into a Web application, we have to spend a relatively long
    | amount of time/effort (relative to achieving similar result in a Windows
    | client) - and we have to think very hard about the tradeoffs between
    | functionality and performance... e.g., if you want something approaching
    the
    | functionality provided in a Windows client app you suddenly have the
    | likelihood of a gigantic ViewState with associated performance issues...
    and
    | that's if you can assume an uplevel browser or even IE in particular. I
    | understand that ASP.NET - at the end of the day - simply provides us with
    | powerful tools and methodologies with which we can more easily work with
    the
    | existing Web standards (http/html, etc) on the server side. Powerful as
    | ASP.NET is, it is tied to the basic request/response model of http as we
    now
    | know it - and that is where the client experience is limited.
    |
    | Three Questions:
    | 1. Is my above assessment of ASP.NET and the role it currently plays
    | basically correct?
    |
    | 2. What are the next major changes we can expect in Internet programming
    | during the next 10 years? Do you think we'll still be programming against
    a
    | basic request/response model in which we pretty much send text around the
    | Internet? I'm trying to get a grip on where we are in the current
    paradigm,
    | and when it is likely to shift.
    |
    | Please note I do understand Web Services and the SOA in general - but
    that's
    | all beyond the client; what I'm primarily interested in is the client
    | experience and client capabilities. At the end of the day it doesn't
    matter
    | if your HTML/XHTML/CSS etc comes from Web Service or Web Application -
    there
    | are still huge limitations in the clients as we currently know them.
    |
    | Thanks!
    |
    | -GH
    |
    |
    bruce barker, Nov 6, 2004
    #9
  10. Thank you everyone for your perspective.

    -GH



    "bruce barker" <> wrote in message
    news:%...
    > 1) yes.
    >
    > 2) there are two trends.
    >
    > the Microsoft approach is to use winform apps downloaded from the

    internet.
    > this follows the java applet model, so it may become successful. the

    biggest
    > holdup is clients having the .net vm installed. no current os ships with

    it,
    > a new release is due in 6-8 months. also some proxies block this method.
    > also its a windows only solution.
    >
    > the w3c group is expanding browser capabilities. xforms is being added,
    > along with soap calls from the browser. unfortunately Microsoft's IE

    appears
    > to be a dead product, and none of these features are being added.
    >
    > fast networks favor the second model, slow network favor the first.
    >
    >
    > -- bruce (sqlwork.com)
    >
    > "Guadala Harry" <> wrote in message
    > news:...
    > | This inquiry has to do with the client capabilities and Web client
    > | experience:
    > |
    > | I've been developing rich client apps (Windows desktop client exes in
    > n-tier
    > | architecture) for over 10 years and am relatively new to Web client
    > | development. The other day, Kevin Spencer told someone that Web
    > development
    > | is arguably the most difficult type of programming to do. I couldn't

    agree
    > | more. In many ways it seems to me that in order to develop non trivial
    > | functionality into a Web application, we have to spend a relatively long
    > | amount of time/effort (relative to achieving similar result in a Windows
    > | client) - and we have to think very hard about the tradeoffs between
    > | functionality and performance... e.g., if you want something approaching
    > the
    > | functionality provided in a Windows client app you suddenly have the
    > | likelihood of a gigantic ViewState with associated performance issues...
    > and
    > | that's if you can assume an uplevel browser or even IE in particular. I


    > | understand that ASP.NET - at the end of the day - simply provides us

    with
    > | powerful tools and methodologies with which we can more easily work with
    > the
    > | existing Web standards (http/html, etc) on the server side. Powerful as
    > | ASP.NET is, it is tied to the basic request/response model of http as we
    > now
    > | know it - and that is where the client experience is limited.
    > |
    > | Three Questions:
    > | 1. Is my above assessment of ASP.NET and the role it currently plays
    > | basically correct?
    > |
    > | 2. What are the next major changes we can expect in Internet programming
    > | during the next 10 years? Do you think we'll still be programming

    against
    > a
    > | basic request/response model in which we pretty much send text around

    the
    > | Internet? I'm trying to get a grip on where we are in the current
    > paradigm,
    > | and when it is likely to shift.
    > |
    > | Please note I do understand Web Services and the SOA in general - but
    > that's
    > | all beyond the client; what I'm primarily interested in is the client
    > | experience and client capabilities. At the end of the day it doesn't
    > matter
    > | if your HTML/XHTML/CSS etc comes from Web Service or Web Application -
    > there
    > | are still huge limitations in the clients as we currently know them.
    > |
    > | Thanks!
    > |
    > | -GH
    > |
    > |
    >
    >
    Guadala Harry, Nov 6, 2004
    #10
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Jesper Stocholm
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    8,073
    John Saunders
    Aug 23, 2003
  2. Liet Kynes
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    476
    Liet Kynes
    Nov 26, 2003
  3. Jeff  Fritz
    Replies:
    88
    Views:
    1,546
    Jonathan N. Little
    Oct 22, 2005
  4. Francesco
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    519
    =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Arne_Vajh=F8j?=
    Dec 27, 2006
  5. Kursat
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    302
    Dominick Baier
    May 7, 2007
Loading...

Share This Page