eBusinessBlog.org Leveraging marketing & technology to solve business problems.

Ajax User Experience vs. Adobe Flex User Experience

I came across an interesting post which I commented on over at Read/Write Web, discussing the recent Forrester Research
results of RIA (Rich Internet Applications) vs. HTML. While I think the result of the research is nothing shocking (RIA provides a better user experience than HTML), the bigger issue I would like more insight on is ajax vs. Adobe Flex.

Apparently, this has already been discussed on several sites/blogs (google search "ajax vs. flex"). There are inherent pros and cons to each platform, and I think the debate could go on forever on which is "better." Sort of like J2EE vs. PHP for web application development...or better yet, Mac vs. Windows, or Ford vs. Chevy. Two types of technology that can really get to the same end result (more or less). Obviously, depending on the end result you need, one technology may be better than another. In the case of cars, if you need to do any real work, then you need a Ford ( sorry, I'm a "Ford" guy).

I digress. The issue I would like to initially evaluate is not really the technical implementation discussion but rather the usability and user experience discussion.

Ajax User Experience vs. Adobe Flex User Experience
Do consumers really care that an application is done using Flex vs. Ajax? Does one technology fair well for certain demographics, industries/markets, or services better than another?

Take Glidden Paint for example. Here is their RIA utilizing Adobe Flex:

Painting is a very interactive experience, and the color-picking process should arguably be, too. In the Glidden application, you navigate down to color families which they've so kindly organized for you, and you drag and drop color swatches onto the areas of the photo so you can see how it looks. Very effective. Does it help sell more paint? Probably. Could the same application be done utilizing ajax? Probably, minus drag-and-drop features.

Let's say it was done in ajax, to the best of the most-talented developer's capabilities, designed to look nearly identical where it could:

• Would a consumer know the difference?
• Would consumers using the Flex-based app convert to buyers at a higher percentage?
• Maybe it does become a technical consideration after all?
• What was the cost to get to this solution utilizing flex vs. ajax?

Knowing what I know now, flex is definitely the way to go for the Glidden environment. Why? The subtle touches that flex offers:

• smooth animations
• nice transitions from one color family to the next
• the function of dragging the paint color to the floor or wall

These all contribute to making it a very usable, inspirational, and, well, fun application to use! This is an important consideration that needs to also be made when choosing the technology -- how will your customers benefit from one technology vs. another?

OK, so when is Ajax better than Flex?
In many places. Google maps is one. The ability to grab the map and move it with your mouse is a significant usability benefit of Google Maps over competitor mapping systems. Not to mention that there really are no page loads. Google benefits from a very "plain Jane" UI throughout all of its applications it offers for free. Ajax is a clear winner for them because it provides extreme flexibility, runs entirely on open source software, and well, their target audience wants their product to just work. Light-weight portability is also critical for Google as they branch out into mobile phones, syndicating services, licensing search engine appliances -- dealing with the inherent licensing fees of Flex and the portability to all of the different mediums they play in would be rather difficult. When your target market is the entire world, it's best to K.I.S.S.

I already have an ajax-based web application. Should I port it over to flex?
This is a really interesting question that I do not have the answer to. We will face this same dilemma for our ajax-based project. We've already spent 12 months on the project, it's nearly finished -- does it make technical sense to port the client-facing side of the application over to flex? Does it make business sense? Will it create a happier customer? Will it generate more revenue? Will it be more or less of an ongoing burden as it pertains to maintenance? What about portability to other mediums besides the web (mobile phones, kiosks, etc.)?

I will continue to comment on our progress on our ajax application (I will talk more about it when we actually launch it -- so for now, I have to be vague). We will most certainly do a technical and business analysis of converting from ajax to flex to see if we will see a return on investment. The last thing we want to do is to do something just for the sake of doing it. Converting to flex essentially means halting new development of the existing ajax application -- which also will have an affect on current revenue streams and customer satisfaction. Instead of pumping time and resources into improving what we have already, we're essentially starting the client-side from scratch. Anyway, we'll weigh the pros and cons and I'll post more details as we cross that bridge.

Moral of the story: 3 components to choosing the right RIA technology

1. Which is the best solution for your customer?
2. Which is the best solution from a technical resource standpoint?
3. Which is the best solution from a business/financial standpoint?

In the meantime, we'll chew on research like Forrester's RIA vs. HTML -- but this is fairly common sense. RIA's inherently provide an improved user experience, so they are a home run with consumers. I'll eagerly await more data on which RIA technology drives higher satisfaction and ROI.