You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to users@activemq.apache.org by jenix <je...@digitalartwork.org> on 2008/10/04 17:22:12 UTC
Which client language is better?
Hello,
I will be hiring a developer to develop a small (250 x 250 pixel) widget
that functions similar to a chat program. This widget will be distributed to
1000s of web sites and perhaps displayed on 10,000s of web pages. I would
like this widget to be lightweight, fast and easily installed.
The widget will stream grid data in real-time (ActiveMQ on the back end) but
will require user authentication for them to post. The user will remain on
the remote site while the authentication is done.
If you were to develop such a widget, which language (ava, C, C++, C#, Ruby,
Perl, Python, PHP, OpenWire, Stomp, AJAX, Comet, etc.) would you use and
why?
Thank you for your help and guidance.
Jennifer
--
View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Which-client-language-is-better--tp19813049p19813049.html
Sent from the ActiveMQ - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
Re: Which client language is better?
Posted by Bruce Snyder <br...@gmail.com>.
On Sat, Oct 4, 2008 at 10:12 AM, jenix <je...@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/
Re: Which client language is better?
Posted by jenix <je...@digitalartwork.org>.
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?
Thank you for you help.
Best regards,
Jennifer
--
View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Which-client-language-is-better--tp19813049p19813756.html
Sent from the ActiveMQ - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
Re: Which client language is better?
Posted by Bruce Snyder <br...@gmail.com>.
On Sat, Oct 4, 2008 at 9:22 AM, jenix <je...@digitalartwork.org> wrote:
>
> Hello,
>
> I will be hiring a developer to develop a small (250 x 250 pixel) widget
> that functions similar to a chat program. This widget will be distributed to
> 1000s of web sites and perhaps displayed on 10,000s of web pages. I would
> like this widget to be lightweight, fast and easily installed.
>
> The widget will stream grid data in real-time (ActiveMQ on the back end) but
> will require user authentication for them to post. The user will remain on
> the remote site while the authentication is done.
>
> If you were to develop such a widget, which language (ava, C, C++, C#, Ruby,
> Perl, Python, PHP, OpenWire, Stomp, AJAX, Comet, etc.) would you use and
> why?
If this is really going to be used on thousands of sites, you'll
probably need to develop the same widget in many different languages
so as to offer users a choice. Not everyone can or is willing to run
the same language(s) on their web server, (e.g., some will be able to
use Java, some won't want that, some will like a Perl client, some
won't, etc.). So I think it is best to identify your requirements and
then pick a few languages to use that can meet all of those
requirements.
BTW, OpenWire and Stomp are protocols that are utilized by the various
languages, they're not languages in and of themselves. That being
said, the OpenWire protocol is implemented in C/C++, Java and .NET
whereas the Stomp protocol is implemented by all the supported
languages including the scripting languages. OpenWire can handle
binary data whereas Stomp cannot. Do you need to send binary data? If
so, then you'll need to use one of the OpenWire clients. If not, then
you can use any of the Stomp clients.
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/