Software Development from Ryan

Adobe Apollo, now called AIR, (Adobe Integrated Runtime), the runtime environment that allows you to use existing web technology for apps on the desktop is an obvious next step from building desktop like Ajax applications that seem to be awkwardly confined to a browser window. The technology requires a runtime installation of approximately 10MB, similar to the need to install the Java or .NET runtime to run apps in these technologies. However, AIR stands apart by allowing you to develop your applications using web standard technologies. It also adds desktop application like features including storage on your hard drive.

Also providing storage is Google’s recently announced Gears browser plug providing SQL database like storage from web applications. Both Gears and AIR technologies are responding to a web user’s need for offline storage for their web applications. In favor of gears, the download size is under 10% of the download size for AIR. It appears to be a better solution if you only need to add offline storage to your web application.

On top of offline storage, some of the sample applications for AIR offer a mix of Flash vector based and DHTML user interfaces. Its good to see Adobe taking advantage of Flash, which Macromedia made the most successful browser plugin of all time. And it has had relatively no competition. Until now. It had its crown taken as the king for responsive web applications with the rise of Ajax. Flash is now primarily used for ads, music, video, and games. However, Ajax has not yet won in the category of web application interfaces. A big battle is going on between Google Maps, an Ajax map web app, and Yahoo! Maps, a flash based map web app, (I have to side with Ajax in this case. I still feel like I’m in an emulated environment when I use a flash interface. The buttons aren’t real. This is also one of the downfalls of older Java client apps).

Of course Microsoft sees this battle going on and wants a piece of the action. They have always had great development tools that have really pushed client application development on windows and are now trying to push web application development in the browser with its Silverlight plugin. Silverlight is a very interesting technology that supports a subset of the .NET framework. This means that it is like AIR providing better integration with OS features but differs by running in the browser. The download size is also a subset of the size of the .NET framework at approximately 10MB.

With Microsoft getting in on the action Sun is reminded of an old grudge. It is the company behind Java and once had a compelling browser plugin like Silverlight that provided richer desktop app like features inside the browser. Java applets still crop up from time to time but have nowhere near the usage that Flash has. Recently Sun announced JavaFX as a lightweight framework to build rich applications that seems to be a response to Microsoft’s Silverlight.

As a developer of client side web applications this can be very confusing. Do you write an Ajax application with web technologies like JavaScript and leverage Gears for offline storage, or use ActionScript to build an app based on Flash, or use .NET languages for Silverlight, or Java for JavaFX. Thankfully Adobe AIR has decided to leverage existing web technologies. This is one reason the web has become a better application platform for many apps than the desktop. However, Silverlight and JavaFX use non web standard technology because Java and .NET are better for building and maintaining larger and more complex applications which web standard technologies were not built to handle.

This brings us to where GWT fits in. It uses Java to allow developers to build larger applications and compiles the code down to web standards. It can’t be used to build the multimedia applications that Flash is known for, and Silverlight and AIR are aiming for, but it is the most compelling solution for building Ajax applications.
From a corporate perspective, It’s refreshing to see these large companies providing innovation on the web. It is important for them to have a decent amount of web technology real estate. And with many multi million dollar acquisitions of Web companies this web technology competition fits the place of the Netscape/IE competition in a modern day dot com bubble.

Links:

• Adobe AIR
• Google Gears
• Microsoft Silverlight
• JavaFX
• Google Web Toolkit

There was some talk about Dojo during the GWT podcast with Bruce Johnson, Robert Hanson, and myself comparing it to GWT to build Ajax applications. Dojo has been around longer and may be more mature, GWT leverages java’s development tools, etc.

GWT really excels over the development lifecycle but the one area that I thought it fell behind, and did not think it had much of a chance of catching up, is with the fast tweak/test cycle that fits scripting so well. With GWT you would refresh your browser to see your changes but since GWT compiles java to javascript this would be much slower.

A release candidate for GWT 1.2 was released yesterday with an speed improvment for refreshes during debugging. Bruce Johnson suggests the most efficient develop method with GWT 1.2 in this issue report:

Now caching between runs. Startup is 20-30% faster, and refreshes are much, much faster. Since refreshes are very fast now, the most efficient way to develop is to leave a hosted browser open, make source changes, then click “Refresh”.

I tested this with gpokr and found that startup was 25% faster and refresh was about twice as fast - still not as fast as a refresh of a fully compiled gpokr running in a browser which is a remarkable 1 second. Compare this to the 7 seconds it takes to load the Dojo sample mail application in firefox, (this app seems to have far less functionality than gpokr so it should be faster, this illustrates the advantage of compiling code to javascript eliminating the need for nice looking, readable, debugable javascript that is a tradeoff with speed).