Google Earth - Rich Client or Rich Internet Architecture?

Question

Is Google Earth a Thick Client (Rich Client) application or a Rich Internet Application? If you read the Microsoft Architecture Guide 2.0, they seem to thing GE is a Thick Client, along with any application which is not rendered in a web browser, or on a mobile device?

I think GE is a perfect example of a RIA, together with Microsoft's Virtual Earth (VE) (Now Bing Maps). The fact that GE is not rendered in a browser shouldn't be the defining characteristic for not making it an RIA. Otherwise the Thick Client Architecture just has to sweep up too much.

Give me your opinions and tell me why you say so.

---

See also: Should Rich Client Arch be used in Multi Tier Enterprise Systems

Answer 1

I was under the impression that the difference between thick client and thin client was where the processing happens. My understanding is:

In Google Earth, the real meat of the work happens client side, with the data stored on Google's servers. That would make it a thick client.

However, in Rich Internet Applications (RIAs), the data and the bulk of the processing happens on the server side. There might be some client-side JavaScript, but it doesn't compare to the amount of work done server-side.

Answer 2

Google Earth is a thick client since it has native code that runs directly on the hardware of your local workstation. It also opens sockets by itself to the internet again from the local workstation.

With some fancy caching (which would require a lot of disk) Google Earth could also run without the internet at all. It could also get its data from a Blue Ray Disk as an example.

A RIA application does not have direct access to the hardware of you local workstation. It runs in a sandbox (web browser) and most of the times its code is architecture independent (java, javascript, html, e.t.c)

A RIA application is confined in the browser and does not (normally) do things on its own (reads the disks, opens sockets e.t.c)

Answer 3

The term RIA originated as a marketing term, from Adobe. They were using it to describe Apollo, which was renamed AIR.

Purely as a marketing term, and not a clearly scoped definition, its precise meaning is debatable. Each definition has at least one major counter-example which one would probably not call an RIA.

For example:

• RIAs is a Javascript application which runs in a browser. i.e. GMail is, but Google Earth is not.
• RIAs run on the client, but not in the browser, and have a sizeable conversation with an online service. i.e. Tweetdeck is, but so is Thunderbird.

The terms thick/rich client is a similarly contested word, and is set-up to be in contrast with a Thin Client; which IIRC, were diskless terminals that did all processing on the central mainframe.

The JavaPosse had a very good treatment on this subject in this episode.