5 ms·

Why didn't all JS Framework creators combine into one team to create only one true JS Framework ?

xtrumanx 11y ago
There was a guy who joined the Knockout or Angular team (I forget which) since they had similar ideas for the future of their frameworks. Not too long later, he left them and restarted his project as their vision began to diverge. I don't know why anyone would want One True JS framework. Many of them provide different things. Angular has the kitchen-sink approach handling everything from templating, model-binding, routing and ajax requests and on the other end of the spectrum there are small libraries that do one thing well and encourage their users to adopt other libraries to do other stuff. Choice is a good thing.
- egeozcan 11y ago
  Probably you mean Rob Eisenberg, creator of Durandal[0] for Knockout.js. He first joined the Angular 2 team as they shared visions and Angular 2 was planned to be migratable from Durandal but after a while he left to create Aurelia[1]. [0]: http://durandaljs.com/ http://durandaljs.com/ [1]: http://aurelia.io/ http://aurelia.io/
  - porker 11y ago
    I'm keeping an eye on http://aurelia.io/ http://aurelia.io/ - I like the way it's going. There's no doubt Rob Eisenberg is smart; whether they can build a community & get traction around Aurelia remains to be seen.
- cvrajeesh 11y ago
  Rob Eisenberg - he started with a project called Durandal but now started a different one called aurelia [http://aurelia.io http://aurelia.io]
- trsben 11y ago
  > There was a guy who joined the Knockout or Angular team (I forget which) since they had similar ideas for the future of their frameworks. Not too long later, he left them and restarted his project as their vision began to diverge. http://eisenbergeffect.bluespire.com/leaving-angular/ http://eisenbergeffect.bluespire.com/leaving-angular/
akamel 11y ago
in the long run a few front runners will dominate; but right now diversity is good... it allows us to work out what works and what doesn't. the hardest part of making a framework isn't manpower; it's design, architecture, algorithms...
- collyw 11y ago
  The amount of diversity in JavaScript frameworks is NOT good in my opinion (a back end dev who needs to get a bit of front end stuff done every so often).
  - marrs 11y ago
    It's not like you have to use all or any of them. It's more of a problem if you're a front-end dev looking for work and feel obliged to learn whatever is trending at the moment.
  - Offler 11y ago
    Really? You have React, Angular and Ember. Three libraries or frameworks for building web applications. If you aren't building a web application you might not need any of them. Just use React as the other two are copying/converging toward React. All the other web app UI frameworks? Noise, they won't amount to much and add very little. The last release worth paying attention to was React 2 years ago. Hardly a breakneck pace.
    - collyw 11y ago
      Angular 1 or Angular 2? What about Backbone? Meteor? There are a LOT more than 3 frameworks. The choice is overwhelming when you are not a specialist in JS and its difficult to know where to begin. (Though having tested React recently, its the best of the ones I have used).
petercooper 11y ago
Like how Hacker News, Reddit, Lobsters, Digg and The New York Times could unite to create the one true news site :-D
- skrowl 11y ago
  lol digg. That's still around?
flooq 11y ago
For the reasons we don't have one true server-side framework, (other than languages).
- revskill 11y ago
  I think Javascript is the best choice for front-end development (as JS is supported by all browsers natively). It's different with server-side languages.
d_luaz 11y ago
Then we would have United Earth Federation followed by United Galaxy Federation :) I guess a healthy amount of options are good, since everyone have their own preferences. Each framework might seems to be solving the same problem, but each have their own philosophy and unique approach. Without diversity, we won't have rice, sushi and burgers. I know it's pain in the ass to evaluate a framework or language, thus I build StackBus (http://www.stackbus.com/ http://www.stackbus.com/), a place where people share what stack they use, why they use it and to build what kind of product, providing more useful insights when making choices.
pdkl95 11y ago
Even if you could make that happen, it would only result everyone having to choose between (N+1) frameworks. ( https://xkcd.com/927/ https://xkcd.com/927/ )
aikah 11y ago
> Why didn't all JS Framework creators combine into one team to create only one true JS Framework ? Because devs will never agree on what should be the only one true JS Framework. Like programmers will never agree on what the one true language should look like. Just take JS itself, some devs think it's the "best language ever", others despise it. Obviously things like unidirectional data flow is getting traction in every big framework. Yet some people think it's "magics" since the DOM doesn't work that way. Who got it wrong? all these fancy framework creators or people that wrote the DOM ? well the point is both were created for different needs , thus the reason why there will never be one true framework. Because developers have different needs and project requirements.
- marrs 11y ago
  And also because different sites have different requirements that would make one framework/library more suitable than another.
deleted 11y ago
[deleted]
JDDunn9 11y ago
We did. It's http://vanilla-js.com http://vanilla-js.com (which is also releasing the 2.0 version)
- joewrong 11y ago
  There are even libraries to make version 5 code compatible with version 6.
- mikewhy 11y ago
  Pssst, the javascript on that page seems to be broken. Not a great first impression for a javascript library. http://gfycat.com/BrilliantUnfitLadybug http://gfycat.com/BrilliantUnfitLadybug
  - cloverich 11y ago
    (Vanilla JS is javascript on its own, no framework. Its a joke -- all of those features are native javascript features).
    - mikewhy 11y ago
      Ahhhh egg on my face. Thanks for the tip.
- dukerutledge 11y ago
  Wow, I like the feature selector. That page has gotten snarkier since I last looked.
k__ 11y ago
There will probably be lesser frameworks in the future. Everyone is converging to components based development and web-components are a standard, so they will be more similar than with the "we do our own idea of MVC" in the past.
- pc86 11y ago
  fewer
JustSomeNobody 11y ago
Developers have an itch to scratch. That itch is that they enjoy making stuff. If that itch isn't getting scratched at their day job, they will come home and develop a framework they will then blog about. Other devs will read about it, and their itch to work on the latest technology isn't getting scratched so they will start to use it. This cycle continues until the internet crumbles under the weight of all this crap.
savanaly 11y ago
I know right? Competition is famously awful at delivering progress.

There was a guy who joined the Knockout or Angular team (I forget which) since they had similar ideas for the future of their frameworks. Not too long later, he left them and restarted his project as their vision began to diverge. I don't know why anyone would want One True JS framework. Many of them provide different things. Angular has the kitchen-sink approach handling everything from templating, model-binding, routing and ajax requests and on the other end of the spectrum there are small libraries that do one thing well and encourage their users to adopt other libraries to do other stuff. Choice is a good thing.

egeozcan 11y ago
Probably you mean Rob Eisenberg, creator of Durandal[0] for Knockout.js. He first joined the Angular 2 team as they shared visions and Angular 2 was planned to be migratable from Durandal but after a while he left to create Aurelia[1]. [0]: http://durandaljs.com/ http://durandaljs.com/ [1]: http://aurelia.io/ http://aurelia.io/
- porker 11y ago
  I'm keeping an eye on http://aurelia.io/ http://aurelia.io/ - I like the way it's going. There's no doubt Rob Eisenberg is smart; whether they can build a community & get traction around Aurelia remains to be seen.
cvrajeesh 11y ago
Rob Eisenberg - he started with a project called Durandal but now started a different one called aurelia [http://aurelia.io http://aurelia.io]
trsben 11y ago
> There was a guy who joined the Knockout or Angular team (I forget which) since they had similar ideas for the future of their frameworks. Not too long later, he left them and restarted his project as their vision began to diverge. http://eisenbergeffect.bluespire.com/leaving-angular/ http://eisenbergeffect.bluespire.com/leaving-angular/

akamel 11y ago

in the long run a few front runners will dominate; but right now diversity is good... it allows us to work out what works and what doesn't. the hardest part of making a framework isn't manpower; it's design, architecture, algorithms...

collyw 11y ago
The amount of diversity in JavaScript frameworks is NOT good in my opinion (a back end dev who needs to get a bit of front end stuff done every so often).
- marrs 11y ago
  It's not like you have to use all or any of them. It's more of a problem if you're a front-end dev looking for work and feel obliged to learn whatever is trending at the moment.
- Offler 11y ago
  Really? You have React, Angular and Ember. Three libraries or frameworks for building web applications. If you aren't building a web application you might not need any of them. Just use React as the other two are copying/converging toward React. All the other web app UI frameworks? Noise, they won't amount to much and add very little. The last release worth paying attention to was React 2 years ago. Hardly a breakneck pace.
  - collyw 11y ago
    Angular 1 or Angular 2? What about Backbone? Meteor? There are a LOT more than 3 frameworks. The choice is overwhelming when you are not a specialist in JS and its difficult to know where to begin. (Though having tested React recently, its the best of the ones I have used).

petercooper 11y ago

Like how Hacker News, Reddit, Lobsters, Digg and The New York Times could unite to create the one true news site :-D

skrowl 11y ago
lol digg. That's still around?

flooq 11y ago

For the reasons we don't have one true server-side framework, (other than languages).

revskill 11y ago
I think Javascript is the best choice for front-end development (as JS is supported by all browsers natively). It's different with server-side languages.

d_luaz 11y ago

Then we would have United Earth Federation followed by United Galaxy Federation :) I guess a healthy amount of options are good, since everyone have their own preferences. Each framework might seems to be solving the same problem, but each have their own philosophy and unique approach. Without diversity, we won't have rice, sushi and burgers. I know it's pain in the ass to evaluate a framework or language, thus I build StackBus (http://www.stackbus.com/ http://www.stackbus.com/), a place where people share what stack they use, why they use it and to build what kind of product, providing more useful insights when making choices.

pdkl95 11y ago

Even if you could make that happen, it would only result everyone having to choose between (N+1) frameworks. ( https://xkcd.com/927/ https://xkcd.com/927/ )

aikah 11y ago

> Why didn't all JS Framework creators combine into one team to create only one true JS Framework ? Because devs will never agree on what should be the only one true JS Framework. Like programmers will never agree on what the one true language should look like. Just take JS itself, some devs think it's the "best language ever", others despise it. Obviously things like unidirectional data flow is getting traction in every big framework. Yet some people think it's "magics" since the DOM doesn't work that way. Who got it wrong? all these fancy framework creators or people that wrote the DOM ? well the point is both were created for different needs , thus the reason why there will never be one true framework. Because developers have different needs and project requirements.

marrs 11y ago
And also because different sites have different requirements that would make one framework/library more suitable than another.

deleted 11y ago

[deleted]

JDDunn9 11y ago

We did. It's http://vanilla-js.com http://vanilla-js.com (which is also releasing the 2.0 version)

joewrong 11y ago
There are even libraries to make version 5 code compatible with version 6.
mikewhy 11y ago
Pssst, the javascript on that page seems to be broken. Not a great first impression for a javascript library. http://gfycat.com/BrilliantUnfitLadybug http://gfycat.com/BrilliantUnfitLadybug
- cloverich 11y ago
  (Vanilla JS is javascript on its own, no framework. Its a joke -- all of those features are native javascript features).
  - mikewhy 11y ago
    Ahhhh egg on my face. Thanks for the tip.
dukerutledge 11y ago
Wow, I like the feature selector. That page has gotten snarkier since I last looked.

k__ 11y ago

There will probably be lesser frameworks in the future. Everyone is converging to components based development and web-components are a standard, so they will be more similar than with the "we do our own idea of MVC" in the past.

pc86 11y ago
fewer

JustSomeNobody 11y ago

Developers have an itch to scratch. That itch is that they enjoy making stuff. If that itch isn't getting scratched at their day job, they will come home and develop a framework they will then blog about. Other devs will read about it, and their itch to work on the latest technology isn't getting scratched so they will start to use it. This cycle continues until the internet crumbles under the weight of all this crap.

savanaly 11y ago

I know right? Competition is famously awful at delivering progress.