JD on EP

Every point he mentions about usability has nothing to do with the technique/tool, but with the person using it.

Throwing arguments like, urls for describing content. Honestly, how many people remember full urls to content compared to the domain name or the url in their favorites folder.

And please, if we had to Nielsen every website we still are using 14px regular fonts, purple/green/black links and have a blog which looks just as horrible as Mr. Nielsen his websites. Somebody, please ducktape him. He clearly has no vision for the web, only for his wallet.

So, I strongly disagree with such postings. It is like saying, because you drive a Ferrari you are a dangerous person because you are more likely to hit someone.

"Honestly, how many people remember full urls to content compared to the domain name or the url in their favorites folder."

It isn't a matter of remembering anything. It's a matter of fundamental web architecture. Each piece of content should have its own URI, and this blog is a perfect example.

The front page is ever-changing. But each post has its own static URI, and can be reached independent of the state of the index document. Both humans and machines always have a place to look when they need to access that info.

That's where many Flash/AJAX implementations fall down. The authors forget that they're operating on a hyperlinked network... it's a result of stunted vision rather than bad technology.

I think statistics show that, if you have a car that is capable of going very fast (ie, a Ferrari, Porche, Lamborghini, etc.), you're more likely to drive fast - which in turn means you are more likely to cause an accident or be involved in an accident. That in turn means you are more likely to hit someone.

I believe that is a valid assumption. Stereotyping is - although not politically correct - usually mathematically accurate. :)

As far as AJAX is concerned, I see no real need for even news about an already existing, already-been-in-use for years technique. It's just another way to do the same things we developers have been doing for a long time. Yay, another methodology.

We'll see what the future brings...

It's interesting to compare Ajax to Flash, except, Ajax isn't a multimedia platform. Aside from the back button and botability of Flash, much of Flash's annoyance arose from half witted animations with skip intro buttons.I don't see Ajax having this problem. You actually need some semblence of programming skill to create an Ajax page. Flash on the other hand requires merely a monkey to create an 4 megabyte animation and a bad name for the platform in 30 seconds. The good flash you do see is created by people with some of the same skill ajax requires. Always good flash utilizes server communication in the same way the ajax solution does. Always.

So. Ajax will continue to astound and surprise. Flash, on the other hand, will continue to struggle with a handful of decent Flash Developers attempting to disuade the masses with XML based true RIA's, while the throngs of idiot Flashkit hacks who recently learned CSS, attempt to create near-sighted, animated title shims for their blog entries, and then blog about how they are monster RIA/CSS hackers.

And how on earth has the usability of browser form widgets never been an issue before?! Surely this has been discovered by the CSS zealot zombies long ago.

Get real. Ajax is a server comm object, nothing more.