4 ms·

People are still using Angular, after version 2 was unexplicably incompatible with v.1..?

ketralnis 9y ago
I don't understand the mentality behind "people are still using _____?" comments. What are you trying to communicate here?
- nkkollaw 9y ago
  I was just genuinely wondering if many people still use Angular, since I don't see it mentioned it that much anymore.
jorgemf 9y ago
Where you say Angular, you can replace it by Python, Swift, ...
savanaly 9y ago
Angular 2 was seriously considered by my company. Having it named "2" was an unfortunate marketing error as in reality it is a new framework inspired by the old one. That shouldn't reflect poorly on the framework though.
- digitalzombie 9y ago
  It does reflect poorly on how they just drop the old one and said we're making something else now. This is one of the reasons why I just gave up on web dev. It's to chaotic and messy. I've basically left this industry and let it sort itself out. I thought maybe after 2-3 years it'll be good again. Recently did some neat data viz front end and wow it didn't get better at all. What the hell happen to harmony? There are shims and shams for es5 and es6... It's even more fragmented.
  - kgreene2 9y ago
    Did they really "just drop the old one"? Angular 2 was announced over 2 years ago, and initially was released 10 months ago. Meanwhile, Angular 1 has continued to receive support this entire time, with the latest release 11 days ago and the latest merge to master being 4 days ago. And, if you're on Angular 1 and want to upgrade, they've published an official migration guide.
    - veidr 9y ago
      No, they didn't. In fact, they just recently released 1.6.5, yet another in a stream of maintenance updates to the old-generation 1.x branch. Technical rants are one of the reasons I enjoy reading this website, and lot of people here like to shit on Angular. But it seems to me the reasons aren't usually technical, they are more techno-political or ford-vs-chevy type arguments. The term "over-engineered" is often thrown out there, and while that's a hard-to-quantify subjective judgement, it does kind of fit. There are many features in Angular, which do lots of things for you, but at the cost of added complexity and a steeper learning curve. But one of the good aspects of being "over-engineered" is the incredibly long sunset window for Angular 1.x (the previous, and largely incompatible generation; 2.x onwards is "current generation"). Maintenance releases to 1.x keep coming out, some of which (1.5) add a bunch of new stuff that makes it easier to modernize your design even under the old framework, and to port your legacy 1.x code to modern Angular when the time comes. Also, there's an well-documented upgrade path, and (importantly!) an officially supported library (ngUpgrade) that lets you make a gradual transition to modern angular, where your old code runs in Angular 1.x, new components run in modern Angular, ngUpgrade helps integrate the two worlds in a single app in the browser. So you can do a component-by-component migration of a production app over years. As a native app developer (and not a fan of JavaScript) who nevertheless last year joined a team that also has to maintain an old, in-production, customer-facing Angular 1.x app, I really like all these "over-engineered" features. That's not to say I love every single thing about Angular but I think a.) it's pretty good, b.) modern version is better than the old one and going in the right direction, and c.) lots of the complaints are more like "they fucked up the upgrade process from 1.x" (they did) or "Google sux brah" (whatever).
danielharrison 9y ago
No. Nobody uses it after the un-backwards-conpatibility scandal of '14. People are in limbo searching for the next angular but, alas, it cannot be found. Do you have any suggestions, your holiness?
- nkkollaw 9y ago
  Well, I'm just saying that if they've done it once—and when their framework was at its peak—they might do it again.

I don't understand the mentality behind "people are still using _____?" comments. What are you trying to communicate here?

nkkollaw 9y ago
I was just genuinely wondering if many people still use Angular, since I don't see it mentioned it that much anymore.

jorgemf 9y ago

Where you say Angular, you can replace it by Python, Swift, ...

savanaly 9y ago

Angular 2 was seriously considered by my company. Having it named "2" was an unfortunate marketing error as in reality it is a new framework inspired by the old one. That shouldn't reflect poorly on the framework though.

digitalzombie 9y ago
It does reflect poorly on how they just drop the old one and said we're making something else now. This is one of the reasons why I just gave up on web dev. It's to chaotic and messy. I've basically left this industry and let it sort itself out. I thought maybe after 2-3 years it'll be good again. Recently did some neat data viz front end and wow it didn't get better at all. What the hell happen to harmony? There are shims and shams for es5 and es6... It's even more fragmented.
- kgreene2 9y ago
  Did they really "just drop the old one"? Angular 2 was announced over 2 years ago, and initially was released 10 months ago. Meanwhile, Angular 1 has continued to receive support this entire time, with the latest release 11 days ago and the latest merge to master being 4 days ago. And, if you're on Angular 1 and want to upgrade, they've published an official migration guide.
  - veidr 9y ago
    No, they didn't. In fact, they just recently released 1.6.5, yet another in a stream of maintenance updates to the old-generation 1.x branch. Technical rants are one of the reasons I enjoy reading this website, and lot of people here like to shit on Angular. But it seems to me the reasons aren't usually technical, they are more techno-political or ford-vs-chevy type arguments. The term "over-engineered" is often thrown out there, and while that's a hard-to-quantify subjective judgement, it does kind of fit. There are many features in Angular, which do lots of things for you, but at the cost of added complexity and a steeper learning curve. But one of the good aspects of being "over-engineered" is the incredibly long sunset window for Angular 1.x (the previous, and largely incompatible generation; 2.x onwards is "current generation"). Maintenance releases to 1.x keep coming out, some of which (1.5) add a bunch of new stuff that makes it easier to modernize your design even under the old framework, and to port your legacy 1.x code to modern Angular when the time comes. Also, there's an well-documented upgrade path, and (importantly!) an officially supported library (ngUpgrade) that lets you make a gradual transition to modern angular, where your old code runs in Angular 1.x, new components run in modern Angular, ngUpgrade helps integrate the two worlds in a single app in the browser. So you can do a component-by-component migration of a production app over years. As a native app developer (and not a fan of JavaScript) who nevertheless last year joined a team that also has to maintain an old, in-production, customer-facing Angular 1.x app, I really like all these "over-engineered" features. That's not to say I love every single thing about Angular but I think a.) it's pretty good, b.) modern version is better than the old one and going in the right direction, and c.) lots of the complaints are more like "they fucked up the upgrade process from 1.x" (they did) or "Google sux brah" (whatever).

danielharrison 9y ago

No. Nobody uses it after the un-backwards-conpatibility scandal of '14. People are in limbo searching for the next angular but, alas, it cannot be found. Do you have any suggestions, your holiness?

nkkollaw 9y ago
Well, I'm just saying that if they've done it once—and when their framework was at its peak—they might do it again.