activemq-users mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Bruce Snyder" <bruce.sny...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Which client language is better?
Date Sat, 04 Oct 2008 19:30:30 GMT
On Sat, Oct 4, 2008 at 10:12 AM, jenix <jennifer@digitalartwork.org> wrote:
>
> Hi Bruce,
>
> Thank you for the reply. The widget will not need to send binary data. I was
> thinking AJAX (comet) maybe the best option but I am not sure what the
> different languages can do or can do better than AJAX.
>
> Most people have JS enabled. Flash is nice, but not sure if it would be as
> lightweight as AJAX. As for java, C, C++, C#, Ruby, Perl, Python, PHP ...
> would not it be possible to keep the widget on our server and embed it in
> the remote site web page? This would not be ideal but maybe an option for
> easy remote installation. For embedding in a web page on a remote site is
> AJAX the best way to keep the widget light and fast? Do any of the other
> languages offer similar advantages as AJAX?

Well that's another option - to host the app on your server and offer
the ability to invoke your app from a form on their website.

Bruce
-- 
perl -e 'print unpack("u30","D0G)U8V4\@4VYY9&5R\"F)R=6-E+G-N>61E<D\!G;6%I;\"YC;VT*"
);'

Apache ActiveMQ - http://activemq.org/
Apache Camel - http://activemq.org/camel/
Apache ServiceMix - http://servicemix.org/

Blog: http://bruceblog.org/

Mime
View raw message