

You used JavaScrript to write WHAT? - estherschindler
http://www.cio.com/article/175950

======
boucher
Favorite sentence: "There is no doubt that overzealous scripters have built
applications that stretch the limits of JavaScript...and in some cases,
reason."

We're quite proud to be stretching the limits of reason :-)

But in all seriousness, this is a decent explanation of the difference between
a web page and a web app. Very few people writing things on the web today
_need_ javascript, and designers of such sites should ensure that their pages
do degrade gracefully. If you're building an application of some reasonable
level of complexity, however, it's probably okay to leave those unwilling to
join the javascript party behind.

------
BrandonM
I take issue with the suggestion to use Flash instead of Javascript. If you
can use Javascript instead of Flash, by all means, do it. Flash is much less
cross-platform, it isn't even 64-bit yet (at least on Linux), it tends to leak
memory all over the place, and it provides more access to my system than I
would like. I block most Flash, with the exception of Youtube and a few
others.

~~~
boucher
While I agree with you that flash sucks, and you should avoid it whenever
possible, I'm not sure he was really saying anything different. He basically
said if you want to work with video, or games, you have to use flash, which
has been true up to this point on the web.

------
eusman
this is the kind of bullshit you would read in 1999 accusing JS. Let's move,
shall we?

Do I have to remind you that IE 5.0 is already 10 years old, IE 6.0 at least
7? and IE 7.0 already 1 year old?

Javascript is obviously here to stay and part of the web reality, whether you
like it or not...

------
bprater
"First and foremost..." Any article using that phrase is undoubtedly the worse
article I've read that week. And ding, ding, this one is!

------
andreyf
Please link to one-paged print version:
<http://www.cio.com/article/print/175950>

