Web 2.0 technologies (e.g. Ajax)

**oracleslave** · 8 May 2008, 14:33

That pageflakes site was so slow to load I was tempted to check it on here: http://downforeveryoneorjustme.com/

**dang65** · 8 May 2008, 14:49

Originally posted by DimPrawn View Post

Maybe I'm old fashioned but I much prefer a website with simple HTML elements such as links and text boxes to these new fangled Ajax sites, with drag and drop, bloated asynchronously loaded "widgets" and strange mouseover tricks.

I guess it's the same with most things... you notice the irritating, badly thought out sites, and don't even notice the good ones. It was the same with Flash when that was all the rage - awful splash screens and attempts to run whole websites through Flash. But there were/are some really clean Flash sites which you only realise are Flash at all when you right-click on something and it tells you which Flash player you're using, or whatever.

I think the same sort of thing applies to Ajax at the moment.

**NickFitz** · 8 May 2008, 14:53

As a Web 2.0 developer, may I say that the pageflakes site represents everything that is wrong with the misapplication of these technologies. Seldom have I seen anything suck as hard as that does.

UPDATE:

"This page is designed for JavaScript-only browsers. In case you have disabled JavaScript, please enable it and reload this page. Otherwise consider installing a JavaScript capable browser such as Mozilla Firefox or Opera."

FAIL

**Lucy** · 8 May 2008, 14:54

The new BBC site is very irritating - they probably paid some masturbating teenager to design it.

**oracleslave** · 8 May 2008, 14:55

Originally posted by Lucy View Post

The new BBC site is very irritating - they probably paid some masturbating teenager to design it.

I know it is tulip but just how did you come to that conclusion?

**Lucy** · 8 May 2008, 14:58

Originally posted by oracleslave View Post

I know it is tulip but just how did you come to that conclusion?

It means one of those wanky 'too cool for school, Adam, with a double D' advertising/marketing types.

**NickFitz** · 8 May 2008, 14:58

Even better, when you visit the site with JS disabled, it still shows that annoying "loading" bar... the site was built by incompetent fools, and if I meet them I'll tell them so to their faces.

It's also inaccessible to people with disabilities who use assistive technologies such as screen readers to access the web

**Lucy** · 8 May 2008, 14:59

Originally posted by zeitghost

How do you get the Sky guide thingie to give you the listing for one channel like the old one did?

You clicked on the channel you were interested in & you got the day's worth of programming...

Please help an Old Lizard with this important problem...

Poor lizard, sorry I can't help.

**DimPrawn** · 8 May 2008, 15:02

Originally posted by Lucy View Post

The new BBC site is very irritating - they probably paid some masturbating teenager to design it.

A good case in point.

So is iGoogle better than Google?

Is the new fangled BBC portal better than the old site?

No.

http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,1895,2193063,00.asp
http://www.rogierbikker.com/articles...-bad-as-flash/

Web 2.0 technologies (e.g. Ajax)