(X)HTML vs Adobe Air vs ?

zenlord · 2010-06-07 08:29:26

Hi,

In my small office I'm using a self designed, simple file (as in dossiers, not docs) management app that I'm still working on, providing new functionalities as we go. Currently, I use plain XHTML, CSS, PostgreSQL, LDAP and calDAV.

To be able to use my screen real estate better, I was planning to update the CSS of this website, so I started looking and came across CSS3 and HTML5, so I'm really considering to jump to these new technologies in order to be able to add more complex capabilities later.

... And then I stumbled across Adobe AIR. If I'm redesigning what I've got, it might be a good idea to use this or another webapp-framework that is compatible through all major OS's (which was my first major reason to use XHTML).

Can anybody give me a solid reason to use a webapp-framework like that? At the moment XHTML fills all my needs, but I'm in no way a programmer (PHP is the best I can, and writing it takes a whole lot of time). Is there a downside to (X)HTML I'm not aware of or is Adobe AIR providing major upsides?

THX!

Zl.

simlan · 2010-06-07 19:03:38

I tested Adobe Air... I liked the way menues are created, but thats all. If your setup is okay for you I would stick with it. Especially when you dont have skills in Javascript / Flash / Flex or some other adobe technology you will have Problems with Air, because it is desingend for these technologies.( All logic done with these languages)
In fact you already have a perfect cross-platform solution...propably better then any RIADesktop Stuff

Last edited by simlan (2010-06-07 19:04:49)

Zeist · 2010-06-07 19:49:49

I don't really see any major advantages to using air. I find that HTML and rails, pylons or php does pretty much everything I really need when doing web-based solutions. I find that technologies such as flash or air just complicates things without really adding any functionality.

alterecco · 2010-06-07 20:07:25

HTML is brilliant, and browsers are some of the best cross platform environments. With HTML5 seeing strong support from modern browsers, there seems to be little that can not be done in a vanilla browser, that used to require flash or some other plugins.

Javascript as a language is getting a lot of attention these days, and is becomming quite a little beast. It is even running well on the server side now, so if you stick to doing HTML/CSS, and learn a bit of javascript, you might even be able to stay with those two technologies on the frontend and backend.

zenlord · 2010-06-08 13:21:06

THX for your reactions.

In the mean while I have seen some nice examples of the possibilities that html5 has to offer (f.e. http://apirocks.com/html5/html5.html#slide1). It all boils down to an update to (x)html, the use of css3 and the use of JS. Especially in the latter I'm lacking experience, but it looks as I need to sit down and do my homework. The possibilities are endless and it looks as though there are some frameworks to make it easier on the designer: jQuery for one has a lot of fans...

Thx again!

Last edited by zenlord (2010-06-08 13:23:02)

xenobrain · 2010-06-12 13:40:56

I haven't used Air, but I know it can do some things a regular web page can't do, like have filesystem access and use an embedded sqlite database. It also has an embedded rendering engine (webkit) which means you don't have to make your app compatible with multiple browsers.

I believe it also has a lot of premade widgets available, whereas html forms have an extremely limited set.

Though, if as you say, html and php is already working for you, you likely don't need these features.

tavianator · 2010-06-12 15:29:58

xenobrain wrote:

I haven't used Air, but I know it can do some things a regular web page can't do, like have filesystem access and use an embedded sqlite database.

Actually, HTML5 has local storage. You can't do SQL queries against it, but it should be enough for most uses. And what use is there for FS access other than file uploads?

It also has an embedded rendering engine (webkit) which means you don't have to make your app compatible with multiple browsers.

Wait, so relying on a proprietary 3rd party plugin makes your web site more portable than one using standard (X)HTML?

I believe it also has a lot of premade widgets available, whereas html forms have an extremely limited set.

HTML5 extends HTML forms by a lot, and jQuery and plenty of other toolkits have more featureful widgets.

xenobrain · 2010-06-13 13:11:56

tavianator wrote:

xenobrain wrote:
I haven't used Air, but I know it can do some things a regular web page can't do, like have filesystem access and use an embedded sqlite database.
Actually, HTML5 has local storage. You can't do SQL queries against it, but it should be enough for most uses. And what use is there for FS access other than file uploads?

Local storage is only supported in Firefox 3.5+, Safari 4+, IE8+, Chrome 4+, which aside from IE8, those versions do not have widespread corporate deployment yet. Also you don't need FS access for uploads, it's for writing to and editing existing files on the OS, like a regular desktop app.

tavianator wrote:

It also has an embedded rendering engine (webkit) which means you don't have to make your app compatible with multiple browsers.
Wait, so relying on a proprietary 3rd party plugin makes your web site more portable than one using standard (X)HTML?

Yes. It may well be easier (and "safer" in the sysadmin's eyes) to deploy an Air application than to update everyone's web browsers. Plus if there are multiple browsers deployed within the company, you don't have to test your app against them.

tavianator wrote:

I believe it also has a lot of premade widgets available, whereas html forms have an extremely limited set.
HTML5 extends HTML forms by a lot, and jQuery and plenty of other toolkits have more featureful widgets.

True, dat. JQuery rocks. I've also been playing with SproutCore as a complete GUI toolkit.

Last edited by xenobrain (2010-06-13 13:14:01)

zenlord · 2010-06-15 13:31:01

THX again for those new insights.

I do use local FS access (documents that are accessible through NFS on the clients), and deploying that with regular HTML, has proven flakey: it all went fine until we changed our server: now some of the clients are no longer granted access to those files.

I am looking for new ways to get access to those files back, so I'm looking to put those files in a DB and serve them from there. That will probably make it easier to serve those files securely over the internet.

Right now I'm comparing jQuery vs Dojo to use with HTML5 and CSS3. Where jQuery looks easier (I have very limited experience with javascript/programming), Dojo is completely open... Functionality looks roughly the same.

Zl.

Last edited by zenlord (2010-06-15 13:33:35)

tavianator · 2010-06-15 16:09:24

zenlord wrote:

Where jQuery looks easier (I have very limited experience with javascript/programming), Dojo is completely open... Functionality looks roughly the same.

How is jQuery not completely open? It's dual GPL/MIT licensed.

zenlord · 2010-06-16 13:25:34

Well, I have not finished looking up the necessary information about them all, but IIRC wikipedia had a comparison table in which Dojo was explicitly described as Open Source and jQuery not.

I might have looked over the nuances, and again: I'm still comparing all kinds of JS frameworks.

To further the initial discussion, I think I will be using this setup for v2 of my program:
* HTML5
* TBS and OpenTBS templating engine
* CSS3
* <JS framework>
* Appcelerator Titanium to build a native (desktop|mobile) app from this webapp.

Has anyone build an app with Appcelerator yet?

THX!

Last edited by zenlord (2010-06-16 13:44:31)

Arch Linux

#1 2010-06-07 08:29:26

(X)HTML vs Adobe Air vs ?

#2 2010-06-07 19:03:38

Re: (X)HTML vs Adobe Air vs ?

#3 2010-06-07 19:49:49

Re: (X)HTML vs Adobe Air vs ?

#4 2010-06-07 20:07:25

Re: (X)HTML vs Adobe Air vs ?

#5 2010-06-08 13:21:06

Re: (X)HTML vs Adobe Air vs ?

#6 2010-06-12 13:40:56

Re: (X)HTML vs Adobe Air vs ?

#7 2010-06-12 15:29:58

Re: (X)HTML vs Adobe Air vs ?

#8 2010-06-13 13:11:56

Re: (X)HTML vs Adobe Air vs ?

#9 2010-06-15 13:31:01

Re: (X)HTML vs Adobe Air vs ?

#10 2010-06-15 16:09:24

Re: (X)HTML vs Adobe Air vs ?

#11 2010-06-16 13:25:34

Re: (X)HTML vs Adobe Air vs ?

Board footer