Topic: jQuery Tools (an alternative to jQuery UI?)  (Read 1287 times)

Pages: [1]   Go Down

#1: 8-Jun-2009, 02:19 PM

kongondo
Posts: 1,390

Anyone tried jQuery Tools? It has received its equal share of good and bad press but it does seem interesting. I will probably be using it though.

Find it here

cheers/k

#2: 8-Jun-2009, 02:52 PM

Moderator

ZAP
Posts: 1,619

I haven't tried it, but it looks very nice indeed. They have packaged together several of the scripts that we commonly use, and it looks like a solid combo to me. What bad press have they received?
"Things are not what they appear to be; nor are they otherwise." - Buddha

"Well, gee, Buddha - that wasn't very helpful..." - ZAP

Useful MODx links: documentation | wiki  | forum guidelines  | bugs & requests  | info you should include with your post | commercial support options

#3: 8-Jun-2009, 02:57 PM

kongondo
Posts: 1,390

It's been mostly good press but there's some people who thought the author was being arrogant toward jQuery UI...in particular these words on his website

Quote
Let's face it: do you really need drag-and-drop, resizable windows or sortable lists in your web applications? Websites are not desktop applications.

There's a lengthy discussion here.... Good thing is that they seem to have made up now and all is well in the community Cheesy

cheers/k



#4: 8-Jun-2009, 03:00 PM

Moderator

ZAP
Posts: 1,619

I pretty much never use jQuery UI because it tends to be humongous, so I guess I agree with that sentiment. Not that the six scripts that are in this package are necessarily the best and only ones that I would generally use, but it seems like a nice toolkit for some applications. Thanks for bringing it to our attention!
"Things are not what they appear to be; nor are they otherwise." - Buddha

"Well, gee, Buddha - that wasn't very helpful..." - ZAP

Useful MODx links: documentation | wiki  | forum guidelines  | bugs & requests  | info you should include with your post | commercial support options

#5: 8-Jun-2009, 03:05 PM

kongondo
Posts: 1,390

No probs, welcome. You know you can customize jQuery UI? You don't need to download the whole package. Having said that...some people still think it is bloated...

/k

#6: 8-Jun-2009, 03:09 PM

Moderator

ZAP
Posts: 1,619

No probs, welcome. You know you can customize jQuery UI? You don't need to download the whole package. Having said that...some people still think it is bloated...
Yep I still feel as if most of the UI scripts are a bit bloated.
"Things are not what they appear to be; nor are they otherwise." - Buddha

"Well, gee, Buddha - that wasn't very helpful..." - ZAP

Useful MODx links: documentation | wiki  | forum guidelines  | bugs & requests  | info you should include with your post | commercial support options

#7: 8-Jun-2009, 03:33 PM

Testers

dev_cw
Posts: 4,179

WWW
Is this based on jQuery or is it based on the UI?
Shane Sponagle | [wiki] Snippet Call Anatomy | MODx Developer Blog | [nettuts] Working With a Content Management Framework: MODx

Something is happening here, but you don't know what it is.
Do you, Mr. Jones?  -  [bob dylan]

#8: 8-Jun-2009, 03:34 PM

kongondo
Posts: 1,390

Based on jQuery...

/k

#9: 8-Jun-2009, 03:34 PM


markhurd
Posts: 69

WWW
I agree with ZAP.  jQuery UI + tabs comes in at 122kb minified. The jQuery Tools equivalent is just over 1kb in size. Neither of those numbers is including jQuery.

I've never had a project that needed all of the functionality that UI provided, but the demos on the Tools website look like what I need 90% of the time.

I plan on giving it a shot in my next project.  I typically use Flowplayer for video embedding anyway so the integration for that is just another benefit.

#10: 8-Jun-2009, 03:40 PM

kongondo
Posts: 1,390

It did cause a "great" buzz in twitter (so I read...)...

/k

#11: 8-Jun-2009, 04:10 PM


mrhaw
Posts: 1,924

modx == freedom

WWW
What is better compressed or uncompressed?
My playground: http://4up2date.info | Twitter: mrhaw
---> Check out: ReadSpeaker webReader Plugin | Support/Comments Thread

--=[ MR. HAW ]=--

#12: 8-Jun-2009, 04:20 PM

kongondo
Posts: 1,390

Compressed, (I suppose - faster load times)...but this will work only when gzipping is enabled on the server side - I am assuming you meant Gzip compression, no? Or did you mean minification?

/k
« Last Edit: 8-Jun-2009, 04:30 PM by kongondo »

#13: 8-Jun-2009, 04:29 PM


mrhaw
Posts: 1,924

modx == freedom

WWW
Ok! ! Statement ! -Unzipping is faster than transfering file!
http://betterexplained.com/articles/how-to-optimize-your-site-with-gzip-compression/
My playground: http://4up2date.info | Twitter: mrhaw
---> Check out: ReadSpeaker webReader Plugin | Support/Comments Thread

--=[ MR. HAW ]=--

#14: 8-Jun-2009, 04:35 PM

kongondo
Posts: 1,390

Thx for that link mrhaw

Here's a live test for the response time improvement of gzipped components.

/k

#15: 8-Jun-2009, 04:41 PM


mrhaw
Posts: 1,924

modx == freedom

WWW
That page rocks, tnx Kongondo! Smiley
« Last Edit: 8-Jun-2009, 05:21 PM by mrhaw »
My playground: http://4up2date.info | Twitter: mrhaw
---> Check out: ReadSpeaker webReader Plugin | Support/Comments Thread

--=[ MR. HAW ]=--

#16: 14-Jun-2009, 01:44 PM

kongondo
Posts: 1,390

Coda slider and more with jQuery Tools

http://blog.themeforest.net/tutorials/coda-slider-and-more-with-jquery-tools/

/k
Pages: [1]   Go Up
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.