Comments on: Beat

By: Zach Blume

Zach Blume — Mon, 15 Aug 2005 01:51:56 +0000

Well, its IS ajax client-side. On the *server side* it is Java. No Java “classes”, though.

By: Mike Cherim

Mike Cherim — Sun, 14 Aug 2005 18:43:47 +0000

By: Jona

Jona — Sat, 13 Aug 2005 17:16:52 +0000

Okay, why in the heck do Ajax-central blogs post about Java apps? I thought it was Ajax-powered because that’s all the blog is supposed to be about. I guess I should’ve actually checked. Ah, well. Thanks, guys, for the encouragement. (Now who’s willing to join the Chategory development team!?)

By: Mike Cherim

Mike Cherim — Fri, 12 Aug 2005 13:54:35 +0000

Long live Chategory. My take on it is this: We strive to reinvent the wheel (GreenBeastCMS is a good example) but it doesn't mean we shouldn't press forward. To deliver something new we must first master something old. Lots a chatting things there, but there is only one you can call your own.

By: Zach Blume

Zach Blume — Fri, 12 Aug 2005 00:43:32 +0000

I had the same feeling Jona, except about Ravana. I had worked and worked and worked, then I saw Cake, and Biscuit. I was like, well, mine is worthless. Then I realized that change and difference, approaching something from a entirely new angle is what leads to innovation. Might as well try.

By: David Brent

David Brent — Fri, 12 Aug 2005 00:05:52 +0000

Bollocks to that one Jona

“Sorry, your browser is not supported by this application!”

Chategory to stay.

By: Robert F.

Robert F. — Thu, 11 Aug 2005 23:11:58 +0000

Word. It’s Java man! I’ve been telling you since you first released Chategory that Java was best suited for chatting, and that’s why people make these systems in Java. But hey, now I’m part of the development team!

Besides, Chategory’s UI beats theirs down below the ground.

By: Matt

Matt — Thu, 11 Aug 2005 21:11:48 +0000

Well, there have been Java based chat clients for some time. I thought the idea behind Chategory was making something powered by Ajax.