Nowadays, many many many web apps require Javascript even for basic functionality. You can certainly design the site in such a way that it will fall back to a site that will work without javascript. Personally, I rely on JS for too many things to consider
making my site work without it.
99.9% of users will have javascript, those that don't are likely running something like noscript, which allows them to turn on JS on an as needed basis. They can turn it on for my site, or they can go somewhere else.
Most modern browsers now have very fast javascript engines, Firefox, Chrome and IE9+ all have excellent JS performance. IE8 is slower, but still plenty fast to deal with these kinds of JS rendering. I'm not very concerned about IE7, and I don't support
IE6 at all.
Google has used this technique for gmail and other apps for years now. It's well known, and works well.
Having said that, I think it requires a special kind of app for a single-page app. It's just another tool in the toolbox. There's nothing to be confused about. And I certainly don't see what you mean by "Abuse".
Sound great. If you try you will find it is slowly than MVC.
It is MVC, how can MVC be slower than MVC? If you mean it will be slower than not using Javascript, then of course. Any time you abstract anything it's slower than not using the abstraction. Using a framework is slower than not using a framework. using
an ORM is slower than not using an ORM.
The question is whether or not the performance is acceptable, and my guess is that any performance issues you notice are not related to Javascript, but rather related to doing an Ajax request. But, you have to consider in the context that you would have
to do a round trip without Ajax as well, you just don't notice it because it's buried in the round trip process we've been conditioned for years to ignore.
My guess is that if you time it, the Ajax version will actually be faster. You just don't notice the non-ajax slowness.
thaicarrot
Contributor
5132 Points
1465 Posts
How would you think about SPA(MVC4)?
Feb 23, 2012 08:30 AM|LINK
Hi,
Seems like there is lots abuse.
http://www.asp.net/single-page-application/spa-samples/sample-bigshelf-application/big-shelf-code
Weera
thaicarrot
Contributor
5132 Points
1465 Posts
Re: How would you think about SPA(MVC4)?
Feb 25, 2012 04:18 AM|LINK
I don't think it is best choice because if the client is disabled JavaScript the whole Web App will be broken.
Other Cons is that too heavyweight at client with lots JavaScript lot function at the same time.
I was found too slowly than MVC. I should take advantages at Server and Client(Progressive Enhancement)
Why Microsoft did such think like that? Confused:
Weera
mystere
Member
395 Points
90 Posts
Re: How would you think about SPA(MVC4)?
Feb 26, 2012 04:13 AM|LINK
Nowadays, many many many web apps require Javascript even for basic functionality. You can certainly design the site in such a way that it will fall back to a site that will work without javascript. Personally, I rely on JS for too many things to consider making my site work without it.
99.9% of users will have javascript, those that don't are likely running something like noscript, which allows them to turn on JS on an as needed basis. They can turn it on for my site, or they can go somewhere else.
Most modern browsers now have very fast javascript engines, Firefox, Chrome and IE9+ all have excellent JS performance. IE8 is slower, but still plenty fast to deal with these kinds of JS rendering. I'm not very concerned about IE7, and I don't support IE6 at all.
Google has used this technique for gmail and other apps for years now. It's well known, and works well.
Having said that, I think it requires a special kind of app for a single-page app. It's just another tool in the toolbox. There's nothing to be confused about. And I certainly don't see what you mean by "Abuse".
thaicarrot
Contributor
5132 Points
1465 Posts
Re: How would you think about SPA(MVC4)?
Feb 26, 2012 06:20 AM|LINK
Sound great. If you try you will find it is slowly than MVC.
Weera
mystere
Member
395 Points
90 Posts
Re: How would you think about SPA(MVC4)?
Feb 26, 2012 06:07 PM|LINK
It is MVC, how can MVC be slower than MVC? If you mean it will be slower than not using Javascript, then of course. Any time you abstract anything it's slower than not using the abstraction. Using a framework is slower than not using a framework. using an ORM is slower than not using an ORM.
The question is whether or not the performance is acceptable, and my guess is that any performance issues you notice are not related to Javascript, but rather related to doing an Ajax request. But, you have to consider in the context that you would have to do a round trip without Ajax as well, you just don't notice it because it's buried in the round trip process we've been conditioned for years to ignore.
My guess is that if you time it, the Ajax version will actually be faster. You just don't notice the non-ajax slowness.