Comments on: Old wine in a new bottle

By: I was Web 2.0 before Web 2.0

I was Web 2.0 before Web 2.0 — Thu, 13 May 2010 01:49:07 +0000

[...] using Javascript and IFRAMEs. This was one of the early techniques would later evolve into what we now call AJAX. Brent used this remote scripting to create a live chat that you could embed in your own blog. [...]

By: Gary Brandenberg

Gary Brandenberg — Sat, 31 Oct 2009 03:11:31 +0000

I think AJAX is here to stay no matter if Google drives its use or not. There are too many applications running it. I also agree that running potentially good content in AJAX is a waste if you’re wanting to optimize your site for search. Gary

By: Dylan

Dylan — Thu, 08 Jan 2009 06:48:34 +0000

I think that you chose a good allegory to compare AJAX with a new bottle. Yes, it sounds to be new but we can find a lot of information about this technology. By the way thanks for the additional details.

By: Reign

Reign — Thu, 27 Sep 2007 02:09:51 +0000

I’m new to this AJAX thing and slowly learning everything about it, and I’m glad that you guys, a discussion like this are a great help to me. Thank you.

By: Iwo

Iwo — Thu, 01 Mar 2007 16:52:17 +0000

Good point, its been around for some time but now the web environment is able to support remote scripting much better.

By: Dougal

Dougal — Tue, 24 May 2005 13:08:07 +0000

Ajax’s affect on search engine indexing will depend entirely on how you use it. If your pages are designed to still function normally without Ajax, then it shouldn’t affect the indexing. If you design your pages such that they can only be used with Javascript enabled, then it could prevent search engines from seeing some of your content (depending on exactly what you’re using Ajax for.

By: Bald Eagle

Bald Eagle — Mon, 23 May 2005 23:12:39 +0000

The â€œright place, right timeâ€ factor is were itâ€™s at I think. The same holds true for cascading style sheets. Now you can design/develop entirely in CCS and forget about tables. In IE that is. Unfortunately, Firefox is gaining market share, but the current version has its flaws when it comes to supporting CSS.

I am wondering: how does using AJAX influence a web pageâ€™s ability to get indexed by search engines?

By: jbot

jbot — Thu, 19 May 2005 15:46:15 +0000

@Kevin Clary:

Let’s face it, Adaptive Path are just bandwaggoning. They hope to get more business, sell more seminars, from this, because they hope by attaching a new name to an old technology they’ll get all the plaudits and more revenue. It’s a con. They’ve invented nothing, but hike up their own plublicity.

By: Kevin Clary

Kevin Clary — Fri, 25 Mar 2005 18:16:30 +0000

Why is Ajax hot now? One word, Google.

By: Dougal

Dougal — Thu, 24 Mar 2005 20:56:16 +0000

Bill S.: I don’t see anything in the original article that states in black-and-white that there is a real distinction between Ajax and Remote Scripting. It does specifically mention XMLHttpRequest as a key component, though. So, technically, you could exclude non-XHR methods from the Ajax umbrella, if you want to be pedantic.

However, I think you’ll find that however specific some people might want to be, the term “Ajax” is going to encompass a more generic range, as I’ve outlined here. At a high level, there is little difference between using IFRAME-based communication or XHR. It’s an implementation detail. Developers are going to freely attach the Ajax moniker to these similar techniques just as a matter of convenience.

It’s kind of like the whole “hacker vs cracker” debate. Many people spend a lot of energy trying to educate the world on the distinction. But the world doesn’t give a flip. Even I’ve given up on that one. I use the word “hacker” for both cases, and let context define the distinction, and when necessary, I explain the difference to my audience.