It’s cool, right?
Of course AJAX is cool, Flash is cool too. At least, it looks cool. But does it truly improve the usability of websites? No. Have a look at the problems that AJAX and Flash have in common:
The back button doesn’t work
With AJAX and Flash page refreshes become unnecessary. While the page changes, you can’t use the back button anymore. We geeks recognize AJAX and Flash and won’t try the back button. But try to explain this to your mom…
The URL doesn’t make sense
Ever tried to bookmark an email message in Gmail? Won’t work. The URL in your address bar is the same for your Inbox and all your mails. Thanks to AJAX. Same applies for Flash of course.
The mental model is broken
People are used to certain behaviors. They have expectations. When something behaves different then expected, the mental model is broken. Because Flash gives designers the ability to create complete new interactions and behaviors, nearly every Flash application behaves differently and thereby unexpectedly. AJAX does the same in a less disastrous way. Visual cues that something has changed are often missing. For i.e. show/hide content.
Google indexing problems
While Flash sites without text alternative won’t get indexed at all. AJAX sites often don’t get indexed properly either because Google doesn’t execute Javascript code. And point 2 ‘The URL doesn’t make sense’ applies here too.
Accessibility restrictions
I know that accessibility spans much further then screen readers, but I do want to use this as an example here. Because it’s (nearly) impossible to use a Flash or AJAX site while using a screen reading browser. Or do I sound to much like Jakob Nielson now?
Besides all these problems we all still like to develop AJAX applications. Including me. Because sometimes being aware of possible problems is enough.
Nik Steffen
7 March 2007
Actually there is a fix for both the ‘back-button’ and the bookmarking problem at http://www.contentwithstyle.co.uk/Articles/38/
rogier
7 March 2007
I was aware of the fix for the back-button. But a fix doesn’t justify, because most developers wont use the fix by default. But thanks for your comment anyway.
Dr. Pete
9 March 2007
The best uses I’ve seen of AJAX are supplemental. NetFlix, for example, provides mouseover popups with movie descriptions and poster/DVD art for their search results. If they preloaded all of that, the site would take forever to load (they sometimes display hundreds of titles on one page), so it’s a real plus when you need additional data quickly.
I think it’s the same argument that’s popped up so many times in web development. If someone says “AJAX is cool, let’s build a site around it”, the result isn’t going to be user-friendly. If they say “I want to accomplish X” and then find AJAX is the best tool (or Flash, Java, etc.), the outcome will be much, much better.
Brendon Swanson
9 March 2007
Thanks for making a point that everyone, sadly, continue to ignore. It’s hard to get clients to understand that, both Flash and AJAX, are completely over-used and overrated.
I appreciate the note.
Gianni Chiappetta
9 March 2007
I disagree. I thin that AJAX has it’s place here on the internet. For instance, many web applications (be they private/corporate, or public) would not be possible without AJAX. A great example would be G-Mail, a fully featured mail client, with a instant messenger, RSS reader, and support for external POP3 accounts … all in one place. Not to mention that this is accessible *anywhere* with out the need to download *anything*. Not possible only a few short years ago. This technology has brought a whole new dimension to the internet.
I do agree with Dr.Pete though, it has it’s place. I don’t think AJAX is meant to build websites with, rather a tool to implement features with. I recently wrote a web application with a feature similar to that of netflix’s, previously this would only have been possible by preloading *all* the images, which would have destroyed usability.
Roger
11 March 2007
I hate waiting for a page refresh. Sometimes Flash and AJAX have their place. Flash, used as a type of widget, like the contact forms on http://www.flashattach.com, is very handy. But I do see the point about the back button. I don’t think it’s a matter of one way or the other. Developers should just be smart about choosing when to use certain code.
rogier
11 March 2007
Thanks for all the comments!
I think we all agree that AJAX is a great tool to accomplish certain tasks but not as I primary tool. I just found out why most developers don’t care about the accessibility issues that come along with AJAX:
A ccessility
J ust
A int
X citing
Credits go to Andy Budd who mentioned this in his presentation at SXSW yesterday.
Tom H
11 March 2007
I disagree that AJAX breaks the mental model (I agree that Flash usually does) — indeed some of the mental models we were used to, that were well standardized and worked (menus, dialogs, etc) pretty much went away for 10 years on the web, and now some are coming back because AJAX allows more discrete control over the user’s view. NetFlix has done a pretty good job using AJAX well, IMHO. Some sites have gone overboard, of course. And all your other points are valid.
I worked for a software company in the late 1980’s that developed a tool for creating graphical user interfaces — this was before OS/2 and Windows (and when Mac was being totally ignored). With this language, you could create any shape or color and click on it. It seems like because you could, most people did. Green text on purple backgrounds, huge fonts, the whole bit.
Eventually, everyone realized that standards were good, and more and more applications started using them. Whatever tool you used, it was the application designers that made things good or bad, not the tool.
AJAX makes sense from a technical standpoint (much more so than Flash, which is just a little virtual machine grafted on a web page). I don’t really see the analogy, except that where people are given a tool, they’ll misuse it.
An interesting subject — glad I StumbleUpon’d your site :-)
Digilicious » Blog Archive » Ajax es igual de malo que Flash
13 March 2007
[…] Tropecé hace algunos dias con el sitio de un estudiante de comunicación y multimedia de Rotterdam, Holanda, su nombre es Rogier Bikker, este tipo, aunque bastante joven, expone un punto que me hace bastante sentido. En su sección Thougths sentencia: “Ajax es igual de malo que Flash“, para hacer esta atrevida sentencia, argumenta los siguientes puntos (ojo que todos los puntos son solucionables, el problema es que los desarrolladores no los están solucionando): […]
Greg Scowen - Usability Consultant
13 March 2007
I am a little late coming into this discussion, so I will just say: Great post. You have got me thinking about this issue now.
Flash infuriates me… well except for little tiny Flash videos in ads or something. But for the most part, the 5 points you made are indeed big issues and until they are addressed an inherent risk remains that AJAX will lose ground as Flash has done.
Ajax es igual de malo que Flash en Huasonic
13 March 2007
[…] Links: - AJAX just as bad as Flash (VÃa Digilicious) Comparte el artÃculo:Comparte este artÃculo (post).. […]
Jero
15 March 2007
I disagree with your conclusion that AJAX is just as bad as Flash. First of all, Flash is a proprietary application while AJAX is a mixture of JavaScript and XML which are both open standards.
Secondly, they both have a complete different usage. Flash is more of a replacement. Youtube, for instance, uses Flash for its video player instead of the user’s local video player. Other websites use it just to achieve a certain visual effect.
AJAX, however, is more of a tool as apposed to a replacement for other application, like Flash is. For instance, take the form I’m currently filling in to post this comment. When I’m done and I click the “Submit Comment” button, the info I filled in is sent to the achtentachtig.com server and I get directed to a result page.
However, what also could’ve been done is if this page would have a script that changes the submit button to a normal button that instead of submitting the form, fires an AJAX request. Then the script could add the comment to the comment list without having to reload the entire page. This results in less bandwidth use without harming the accessibility and it just looks awesome, especially if throw in some JavaScript visual effects (scriptalicious, mootools, etc.) as well.
Deyon
15 March 2007
Before you even wrote this blog you should have considered the fact that the web is a flexible media source. One thing dose not apply for all. Depending on what the needs of the site are will determen(sp) the best way to produce it. Example a graphic portfolio or club site would be much better done in Flash as for a Stock or book site would be better in straight HTML. You blog looks more like….Dont use a sports car to go shopping for food. Well Duh! And about the back button, a good designer would design the site in such a way that the site would flow..that way the user has no need for the back button.
tux86
21 March 2007
You’re quoting my mind :) Nice article. Well, I am going to develop some AJAX scripts, too, but AJAX ist really not gonna rescue the world. It’s just fashion for some time - like Flash was/is.
Abstract: If I had to choose between Flash and AJAX, I would take AJAX… because it’s printer friendly and Flash really is not.
Cheers and go on like this!
– tux.
Quinti
22 March 2007
is not true the point 4.
[cite]
Google indexing problems
While Flash sites without text alternative won’t get indexed at all. AJAX sites often don’t get indexed properly either because Google doesn’t execute Javascript code. And point 2 ‘The URL doesn’t make sense’ applies here too.
[/cite]
at this moment, flash is INVISIBLE in the http://www.
while with ajax, (don’t forget AJAX uses XML, XHTML and JS, standards and open = is well-read for any machine, LEGIBLE.
This is like that
regards
Gimsys
23 March 2007
I agree , what’s the point of all that fuss with making an ajax interface , it ain’t worth it
Anonymous
30 March 2007
Ajax is pretty great for the following examples alone:
- Amazon see all 40 items nonsense (cleaner)
- Netflix (mentioned above)
- image galleries!!!!
- multi-layer tabbed windows in a single corner of an html page (see Google widgets)
For many conceivable purposes, Ajax is fantastic and much less troublesome than non-searchable Flash.
Both are the future, too. In Japan, everything uses Flash. In 5 years, it will be the same situation in slow-moving USA once we finally get on top of that cell phone situation…
Zealander
11 April 2007
You’re mostly right. AJAX is very much like Flash equally in its advantages and disadvantages. But the major difference is the fact that with AJAX, users don’t have to *download and install* any proprietary program to view the site.
That was the reason why the company I work at moved from Flash to AJAX — one of the clients refused to install and/or upgrade Flash on its users stations.
“Corporate Policy”, you see… :)