Try knockout. I wrote a quick intro to it a few days ago: http://returnbooleantrue.blogspot.com/2012/12/architecting-k... I personally don't like backbone that much. I don't know why so many people love the damn thing. It is hard to understand and not even that great.
Rant: Backbone, Angular, Meteor, Derby
21–30 of 163 posts
Re: Rant: Backbone, Angular, Meteor, Derby
#22Re: Rant: Backbone, Angular, Meteor, Derby
#23I switched to Backbone and got going right away, in half a day of reading the docs and watching a couple of peepcode videos and I was off and didn't look back.
Maybe the Ember docs have improved in the last couple of months but at the time it was just a non-starter for me.
edit: I believe the issue was around Ember Data/REST. Out of the box it didn't support polling data on a REST interface, which seemed absolutely critical/fundamental to a JS framework. I found a plugin I believe called Ember Data, but documentation was very sparse and I couldn't even get a simple example going. This is going on memory so this could be slightly wrong or different today.
Re: Rant: Backbone, Angular, Meteor, Derby
#24Here's the guiding principle behind Meteor. There should be a dramatically faster, more accessible way to write applications. Improving that developer experience means rethinking some things: autopublish and minimongo, so you can jump right into a new app's UX in the first five minutes; one-line authentication (http://meteor.com/authcast); synchronous APIs that are more comfortable for a lot of developers; dirt-simple reactive templates; hot code push.
Focusing on that kernel of development experience means some other things -- REST, routing, form building -- need more time to fully bake, with hacks like __meteor_bootstrap__ and phantom for apps that need them now. We think that's a good tradeoff pre 1.0.
Re: Rant: Backbone, Angular, Meteor, Derby
#25all of them will become obsolete once ecmascript.next kicks in
Do tell
Re: Rant: Backbone, Angular, Meteor, Derby
#26Ok, you like angular. I don't. It has too much magic and forces you to pollute your html with ng attributes. Blanket statements about frameworks like this grow old. So much of the decision comes down to individual preference and the needs of the project. No need to rant about it. I can't really speak on derby vs meteor but I imagine it's the same.
Re: Rant: Backbone, Angular, Meteor, Derby
#27Re: Rant: Backbone, Angular, Meteor, Derby
#28Re: Rant: Backbone, Angular, Meteor, Derby
#29I wanted to use Ember, and I started going down that road, but I just didn't click with it. I didn't progress past the tutorial! I can't remember what exactly I didn't get working, but I just felt very lost and overwhelmed, and that was spending a couple of days reading around online, looking at the code and examples.* I switched to Backbone and got going right away, in half a day of reading the docs and watching a c…
Re: Rant: Backbone, Angular, Meteor, Derby
#30Ok, you like angular. I don't. It has too much magic and forces you to pollute your html with ng attributes. Blanket statements about frameworks like this grow old. So much of the decision comes down to individual preference and the needs of the project. No need to rant about it. I can't really speak on derby vs meteor but I imagine it's the same.
It's not like that. I'm saying use Angular, Ember, Knockout, whatever - just not Backbone. Unless you know Backbone is what's needed for your project, or you yourself really love Backbone. What I'm discouraging here is its popularity as the de-facto client MV*. I'm under the impression that most people today, when thinking about their next JS project, will use Backbone because it's the most popularly-touted framework…