61–70 of 336 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
And I haven't had a client ask for a javascript app ever. This is why anecdotes aren't very useful.
Insert mis-attributed Henry Ford quote about customers wanting faster horses
While I was reading this post, the page automatically reloaded to something that said "oops, this page can't be found", and then a few seconds later loaded back to the original. This is while I was simply reading the text, not interacting with the page at all. Somehow, through the magic of JavaScript and Websockets, they managed break passively reading static content.
Let's all hop on the next hip web trend, guys! Rails has become so boring and mature. There are many languages better than Javascript for server-side programs, but monoculture is so much cooler. One size fits all and you'll like it.
This is what Java guys said about Rails. "Hipness" is absolutely unrelated to whether something is actually good or not. I firmly believe that Meteor is a super fast way to build a certain kind of web app that just so happens to be very popular in businesses: CRUD apps where users can see other user's changes to data in real time. I will admit that older users are actually creeped out by other people seeing them type…
Rails was a fad. Meteor is a fad. Keep your nose out of hype.
First, when I load http://differential.io/blog and click a link for an old article, the content of the "Why Meteor will kill Ruby on Rails" article is displayed instead of the content of the article I wanted to read. This happens for every article.
Second, when I load http://differential.io/blog, scroll down to an old article, click the article's link, and then click my Back button, I'm directed to the top of http://differential.io/blog, not to the middle of the page where I left off. Very annoying.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It is already happening. Not specifically with python or ruby (although possibly, I don't follow them), but several languages have "compile to javascript" options now. Just like we treat CSS as purely for the machine generated from the SASS which is for people, we treat javascript as purely for the machine generated from the haskell which is for people.
True, such options are available. To my understanding there is a performance hit involved, though, unless something like asm.js is used. I also believe there are some current projects that compile Python and Ruby into JS, but I'm not sure how mature they are.
- Both seek to make the divide between server and client "seamless", marshaling data back and forth so that you can "call" server code from the client and vice-versa.
- Both tout the ability to do all your development in a single language
- Both claim impressive gains for RAD
ASP.Net had some impressive demos for its time. But as we know, the warts emerged:
- as apps grew larger and more complicated, the claim of "seamless" integration started to break down. The background traffic increased until the latency became untenable. Now you had to diagnose problems in a system that had been designed to be "invisible," meaning it was hostile to exploration. Why will Meteor be different?
- The "one language" (VB.Net for ASP.Net, before C# became big) wasn't so hot a foundation. One word: Javascript.
- It was an island. The background data-marshaling framework meant that it didn't play well with other software unless that software had been explicitly written/adapted to work with ASP.Net. ASP.Net wasn't bad at first, but the vaster ecosystem of the web quickly distanced it. What's the upgrade path for a Meteor app? What if I want to use Angular with it?
> Java promised this too us back in the 90's, but it was too big and bloated and hard to work with LOL @ Java being described as "hard to work with" in comparison to JavaScript. Major indicator of JS developer Stockholm Syndrome right there.
I can't read the site (there's nothing in HTML) but is this a framework that doesn't produce pages viewable without JavaScript? If it is against HTML, my vote is against it.
I'm against this too. Why do we want Javascript engines serving simple text pages instead of HTML? What about accessibility? Look at the source code of the linked article. What would a screenreader user encounter if they visited this page?