tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11599526.post112347641812158913..comments2022-12-15T20:47:08.015-08:00Comments on Looks Good Works Well: PIAs vs RIAsBill Scotthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12024727845077253669noreply@blogger.comBlogger5125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11599526.post-84698531679495167702009-02-23T12:48:00.000-08:002009-02-23T12:48:00.000-08:00My point of view is that what you call PIAs are no...My point of view is that what you call PIAs are not applications at all, but a collection of pages - a website. So I think of it as website vs webapp.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11599526.post-1150160744549124892006-06-12T18:05:00.000-07:002006-06-12T18:05:00.000-07:00As an old time GUI developer frustrated by how har...As an old time GUI developer frustrated by how hard it was to develop really nice web app UIs prior to AJAX, I saw "PIA" and assumed you were making a joke. i.e. "Pain in the A**". :)Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11599526.post-1131961813393255002005-11-14T01:50:00.000-08:002005-11-14T01:50:00.000-08:00The reason I'm not comfortable with RIA's is becau...The reason I'm not comfortable with RIA's is because it could also refer to applications like realplayer or itunes. Those are applications that are rich and access the internet for most of their content. They are rich applications that are internet-enabled. <BR/><BR/>I like RWA's much better - Rich web applications. So PWA's and RWA's.Prasant Sivadasanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00734994621102744464noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11599526.post-1123566080786779092005-08-08T22:41:00.000-07:002005-08-08T22:41:00.000-07:00I like it Bill! Small and symmetrical.PIA could al...I like it Bill! Small and symmetrical.<BR/>PIA could also stand for Poor Internet Application in obvious contrast with Rich Internet Application...Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11599526.post-1123521114398021212005-08-08T10:11:00.000-07:002005-08-08T10:11:00.000-07:00AJAX quickly became popular because it looked diff...AJAX quickly became popular because it looked different and Web 2.0 is just geeky enough to be accepted. They don't exactly describe what you mean though. I've been struggling with the same thing, but in my case, I am still so stuck in the old way of doing things that I call them "the normal way" and "with AJAX and stuff".<BR/><BR/>I think of AJAX only as XMLHttpRequest, but others are using it as the word you are looking for. That still doesn't say anything about the old model. NAJAX (No AJAX)? :)<BR/><BR/>We could just hijack Web 1.0 and Web 2.0, if we wanted, but I think a descriptive names are better, if someone can just come up with good ones.<BR/><BR/>At first sight, I didn't like PIA and RIA. Do we really need more acronyms? :) And Pia is a girl name in Swedish and RIA sounds too much like RIAA.<BR/><BR/>But the more I think about it, the more I like PIA. I sometimes ask myself and others if we want "an application on the web" or "a bunch of webpages with some functions linked together".Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com