Is Rich Internet Application a Bad Term?

I had an interesting conversation last week with someone who thought that the term Rich Internet Application was kind of ambiguous. As I’ve connected with more people in the space, I find that their definitions of Rich Internet Applications all seem different. Is it about offline applications? Is it about new browser experiences? Is it desktop applications?

The term does seem kind of odd in today’s world. Are there really any applications that aren’t connected to the internet? The term Rich Internet Application was coined way back in March of 2002, long before broadband was a realistic possibility for many people and before the web had really transformed everything.

I love the ‘RIA’ acronym, but is Rich Internet Application a bit outdated? Do we need something better like Rich Interactive Application, or is the Rich Internet Application correct, it just needs better defining? Should we be talking about RIAs that include Rich Desktop Applications, Rich Web Applications? What do you think?

[tags]Rich Internet Applications[/tags]

http://www.agilefusion.com Alexey Krasnoriadtsev

Interesting thoughts. I like the concept of Rich Web Application, though I’m not sure how would you define the Rich Web Application ?
http://www.usefulconcept.com Joshua

As someone who probably doesn’t know the right meaning for RIA it seems to me that as time goes on Rich Internet Application will lose its meaning. It is relevant now and in the past because it isn’t the norm. But as more and more web sites, applications, widgets, etc. leverage all the tools and combined knowledge out there RIA will be a non-term. In fact the trend now being the merger and connection of all things, the notion of independent applications (web or desktop or other) is going to be comical.

Instead I think you are correct in that it will be further refined and redefined. Many people no longer “get on the internet”. Instead we think about the tasks we undergo. IM, email, surf. Even then those terms are losing their effective meaning being merged into their base tasks of ‘look something up’ or ‘tell someone something’.

Twitter being a good very simple example of the future. Our vocabulary will be changing every few years for a good time to come.
Doug Laakso

Personally, the term Rich Internet Application (RIA) never clicked with me. How about Great User Experience (GUE) or It Just Works (IJW)?
Marlon Smith

I like Rich Connected Application (RCA), the Internet in RIA has never sit right with me. When I here Internet, my mind immediatley associates the topic with a browser. RCA may be a little too subtle of a change, poeple typicaly tend not to gravite to something simular.

So we need something new, cool and hip!

AJAX was something else years ago, but it took the term AJAX for it to be new and hot again.
http://www.robtoole.com/blog Rob Toole

It’s all about the ‘Rich’.

My job title two years ago was suggested to be ‘Senior Multimedia Designer’. Multimedia? What is this, 1998? I suggested ‘Rich Media’ instead of multimedia and they agreed. Today my title is ‘Manager – Rich Media’. Has a nice ring to it.

So I think the ‘Rich Media’ is appropriate for now. Though someday it will sound like outdated like ‘multimedia’.
Phillip Kerman

I keep trying to tell people “multimedia” is not the term anymore–but for RIA I think “application” is plenty. I mean, it’s like do you say you have a “car” or do you say you have a “V8 with 250 HP”? Okay, sure you say if you have a hybrid… but that’s sort of short lived… even now it’s callled “alternative fuel”. The point is that terms get condensed and simplified.

“Rich” is not exactly a new term. Like RTF for example. Whatever… I’d still say that unless the term adds meaning then it’s a distraction.
http://www.go2ria.com Mike Brunt

Help am I losing the point of my RIA, am I a pain in the RIA? Probably; these are my thoughts. Rich Internet Application will stick because it is used so ubiquitously and in truth it does strike a chord because HTML could only get us so far. Another important point is this, many Enterprises have tried and trying to use web based applications to replace legacy desktop-main frame apps. I define web based apps as those served by a web server; CF, Flex and Apollo take us beyond that. In the same way that the Internet will always be with us and the world Wide Web so will RIA’s – or I had better change my domain name quick ;O)
http://blog.digitalbackcountry.com Ryan Stewart

Cool, good stuff guys, thanks for leaving your thoughts. I wish we had something sexy like Ajax . Might make marketing it easier.
http://www.riapedia.com/ Mike Potter

I’m not a big fan of rich Internet applications. My thought has always been that as the Internet goes everywhere, the notion of an “internet” application becomes irrelevant. They become, simply, applications.

Then you’re left with rich applications. Not sure what those are, but somehow they’re different from “regular” applications?

If this happens, I’ll need to find some other meaning for RIA at http://www.riapedia.com/

Mike
http://agilefusion.com Alexey Krasnoriadtsev

Hybrid Web Applications – as flex apps are hybrid of thin and thick client.
http://www.iiilive.com Don

I believe the name “Rich Internet Applications” has it’s limitations but I think Ryans mention of “Rich Interactive Applications” could be the perfect fit for this type of development as well. It would be a shame though, I purchased riaondemand.com and was looking forward to developing my RIA’s on that site. Now I may be looking for riondemand, etc etc… =op
Pingback: 2007: The year of the RIA « Microsoft blog for and about UK Web Agencies

Ryan Stewart – Mountaineer Coding

Just an average guy trying to drink above average beer.