« Add firstname.lastname@example.org to your contacts list |
| Hurricane Ajax - The Aftermath »
This latest Alertbox article "Why Ajax Sucks (Most of the time)" is quite predictable, but I thought that it looked a bit familiar.
It looks remarkably similar to a similar Alertbox article published in 1996 called "Why Frames Suck".
Perhaps there really is "nothing new under the sun".
Posted at 08:08 PM in Usability | Permalink
Ooooh! This article is THAT old ? now i understand why coprnerstown problem is hard using of BACK button.
Now, when even Microsoft had grown to get the idea of tabbed browsing, BACK button has almost no sense. I use it 2-3 times per week, if not less.
2web-master: and "xmpp:email@example.com" is NOT "Invalid URL"
December 30, 2005 at 08:23 AM
Is that MSIE 5 on the screenshots?
December 13, 2005 at 10:12 AM
At the bottom of the page on http://www.usabilityviews.com/ajaxsucks.html it says it's a spoof article
December 07, 2005 at 06:43 PM
From the above link (ajaxian.com):
"Between page refreshes, states usually aren't important enough to warrant a unique URL anyway."
This is exactly what I thought. Who'd want to bookmark a half-filled form? As far as I understand, Ajax is primarily used for that sort of thing... If you use Ajax for site navigation, then you're surely doomed, but for enhanced form filling there should be no problem. Since URL-incompatibility is the only fundamental problem Nielsen focuses on, I think there just might be room for Ajax in the future.
Walter Stryder |
December 07, 2005 at 10:03 AM
Hey, those screenshots look remarkably similar to IE.
Surely you don't seriously use IE as your main browser... do you?
Perhaps there really is nothing under the hood...
December 06, 2005 at 11:22 PM
Chris Griego |
December 06, 2005 at 10:28 PM
December 06, 2005 at 06:13 PM
The comments to this entry are closed.