Open Thread: Do Rich Internet Applications Matter to You?
At the beginning of this month, Microsoft made noise at MIX ’07 about their Silverlight platform designed to bring .NET to the browser at the same time it knocks Adobe’s Flash out of it. Both Silverlight and Flash aim at the rich internet application space — a perceived gap in what users want and what they are getting from their overly light web apps. The idea is that we need more rich interactivity from our browser apps than they give us. But is this just developer fantasy, or does it represent a real end user need?
In 2003, Sun technologist Tim Bray observed that “both IT admins and end-users prefer browser-based apps to traditional compiled clients, for everything except content creation.” He suggests that it’s mainly developers who perceive the need for rich Internet applications.
I’m curious what you really want out of your application interfaces. Gmail, a “poor” Internet application in that it’s completely Ajax-based, offers many people a more-than-acceptable interface to email. Del.icio.us also provides plenty of power without richness. Zoho Writer may be a fine replacement for “rich” offline word processors in an era of web publishing.
True, most of us have a need for desktop applications, especially related to our particular profession. Graphic designers need PhotoShop, book authors need MS Word or OpenOffice, software developers might choose Eclipse. Perhaps rich desktop applications and poor Internet applications are complements, never to converge into the hybrid web-desktop apps trumpeted by web technology futurists.
Do you see a need for more richness in your Internet applications? What desktop applications will you continue to use into the indefinite future? What have you moved into the browser?
Related research and analysis from GigaOM Pro:
Subscriber content. Sign up for a free trial.
I do not need rich internet applications. What I need are applications that work both online and offline out of the browser.
Nope, I like my Web applications simple with just a touch of AJAX where it improves the user experience.
I often get turned off when I get to a site and I have to wait for the animation to play before I get to the content itself.
Another problem with Flash based sites, is (correct me if I am wrong) that they do not have the usual page index.
Take care
Serge
Blog:
http://www.sergetheconcierge.com
I find that I’m moving more and more into the browser. I use web-based email, calendaring, bookmarking, feed reader and storage applications. I also use a web-based project management/CRM tool (dotProject, although I’m giving SugarCRM a test-drive), and I’m completely in love with Zoho’s Office suite.
I do occasionally find myself using desktop and web apps in a complementary way. I’ll sometimes create a document offline, then import it into an online app for storage and future access.
I accept RIAs for what they are and where they are. A limited feature set is the trade off for greater access. But I find that I most of the web apps I use do most of what I need them to do most of the time.
My biggest concern is portability. Give me the ability to export all of my documents at once in case you go out of business or something.
There is always going to be a hybrid of Internet apps and Desktop Apps. The more features you need, the more your going to steer clear of Internet apps.
RIA is nice, ajax is good thing to have also! but what matters most is the use of all these to get your job done!
We used to get things right like 5 years ago when nobody was speaking for web 2.0 and RIA!
Best
Whatever can eliminate excessive page reloads on submit works for me.
However, I still don’t think web apps and broadband connections are robust enough compared to other compiled apps.
Also, the online/offline problem is a HUGE issue for webapps that many web developers like to ignore.
In my opinion, RIA is a phrase that was developed by Adobe (or Macromedia at the time) just for marketing purposes. They were seeing less use of Flash for entire web sites and needed a way to show that it’s still useful in this age of web based applications.
I think Ajax can accomplish a majority of what Flash can in Rich Internet Applications and with less of a learning curve for developers.
I can never get trackbacks from ZDNet to post, but here’s my response – http://blogs.zdnet.com/Stewart/?p=389
Anne, one of these days I am going to convert you. When that happens, I am going to host a party and celebrate. :)
=Ryan
Adobe Evangelist
Wow, so trackbacks are working. I feel like a dummy.