4 ms·

This feels to me a lot like how Rails felt back in 2005. A fundamental leap forward and an understanding of where web technology is going. I haven't felt that

by luigi 15y ago

This feels to me a lot like how Rails felt back in 2005. A fundamental leap forward and an understanding of where web technology is going. I haven't felt that way about Node.js or even its higher-level frameworks like Express or Batman. This feels like "The One", even though I've been absorbing the docs and screencasts only for the last 20 minutes.

kgosser 15y ago
Completely agree. I thought Backbone was the "missing piece", but this really is it. Edit: to clarify I specifically meant a front-end tool to help me leap a level in personal development skill.
- alttab 15y ago
  In my gut I was thinking "Great, another JS framework." I watched the video and was very impressed. And I consider myself a server guy.
- cfontes 15y ago
  I am sorry but there is no way to compare backbone with this one( but it looks very nice, too ), they aim at different things. I am using backbone for a while and it's backend agnostic which is great ! This one have more resemblance to knockout.js( I am talking client side) and it's MVVM design, backbone doesn't even try to approach that problem.
  - kgosser 15y ago
    Very true. I wasn't very explicit that I didn't mean they were the same thing, apples to apples. I meant "missing piece" in terms of the front-end tool to help me leap a level.
- jguimont 15y ago
  Backbone is almost at the top of the javascript toolkit levels. Let's put it in perspective: - backbone - jquery - meteor <- the low level of the high level :) You use meteor as a foundation to build your application as backbone is more or less your application itself. Think "CoreFoundation" vs "AppKit" kind of difference.
AdleyEskridge 15y ago
I somewhat disagree. I want to preface my post by saying I'm smiling ear to ear—I loved the screencast, and I look forward to using this tomorrow on a project I've been thinking about for a while. Here's my concern: If I use Meteor as it is intended, and I also want a my application to have API, I'll have to re-implement all of my logic server-side[1]. This seems like a step back, unless I'm misreading things. I'd love for the Meteor team to address this. Does Meteor make writing APIs easier? [1]: I'm aware that much of the "client-side" code is executed server-side too, but that's due to Meteor's magically transparent client-side framework.
- ollerac 15y ago
  I'm not sure about Meteor, but you may want to look into SocketStream. Last time I checked they were very interested in making web APIs easier to develop.
- geoffschmidt 15y ago
  Hey, one of the Meteor authors here. Meteor's architecture makes it super easy to make an API. It's one of the advantages of building your architecture around sending data around rather than HTML. We couldn't go into everything in the video (it was already too long!), but the piece you're missing is Meteor.methods(). This lets you define methods, which are functions that the client can invoke on the server by calling Meteor.call(). If you choose to also ship the code for these methods to the client (it's optional) then you'll get full latency compensation like we talk about in the video. (This means that Meteor can latency-compensate arbitrarily complex functions, like "read this record, then add 2 to X if this field is false, else create a new record Y.") In fact, every Meteor app already has an API :) Your Meteor client can connect to any other Meteor server by calling Meteor.connect(), and can then subscribe to any realtime datasets that that server is publishing, or invoke any methods available on that server. This is done with a protocol called DDP, but we could map DDP to REST fairly easily.
  - binarymax 15y ago
    Thanks. What does DDP stand for? I found several possible definitions.
pennyblack 15y ago
..and this is how people create hype. now downvote me.
zinkem 15y ago
This is built with Node.js. From the docs: "A Meteor application is a mix of JavaScript that runs inside a client web browser, JavaScript that runs on the Meteor server inside a Node.js container..."
- luigi 15y ago
  I know. I meant that Node.js itself wasn't the fundamental leap that this is. And previous frameworks based on Node haven't attained "The One" status either.
- tlrobinson 15y ago
  I think he's saying this could be the Rails of Node.js. Node.js is very low level and is more analogous to Ruby than Rails.
  - tibbon 15y ago
    Or Node.js == Rack? Something like that. Agreed.
kika 15y ago
I felt that way when I first learned about Kanso JS.
deleted 15y ago
[deleted]
wonnage 15y ago
Interested to see how they'll handle file uploads, authentication, etc. Especially authentication, seeing as clients have full access to the database right now.

by luigi 15y ago

kgosser 15y ago

Completely agree. I thought Backbone was the "missing piece", but this really is it. Edit: to clarify I specifically meant a front-end tool to help me leap a level in personal development skill.

alttab 15y ago
In my gut I was thinking "Great, another JS framework." I watched the video and was very impressed. And I consider myself a server guy.
cfontes 15y ago
I am sorry but there is no way to compare backbone with this one( but it looks very nice, too ), they aim at different things. I am using backbone for a while and it's backend agnostic which is great ! This one have more resemblance to knockout.js( I am talking client side) and it's MVVM design, backbone doesn't even try to approach that problem.
- kgosser 15y ago
  Very true. I wasn't very explicit that I didn't mean they were the same thing, apples to apples. I meant "missing piece" in terms of the front-end tool to help me leap a level.
jguimont 15y ago
Backbone is almost at the top of the javascript toolkit levels. Let's put it in perspective: - backbone - jquery - meteor <- the low level of the high level :) You use meteor as a foundation to build your application as backbone is more or less your application itself. Think "CoreFoundation" vs "AppKit" kind of difference.

AdleyEskridge 15y ago

I somewhat disagree. I want to preface my post by saying I'm smiling ear to ear—I loved the screencast, and I look forward to using this tomorrow on a project I've been thinking about for a while. Here's my concern: If I use Meteor as it is intended, and I also want a my application to have API, I'll have to re-implement all of my logic server-side[1]. This seems like a step back, unless I'm misreading things. I'd love for the Meteor team to address this. Does Meteor make writing APIs easier? [1]: I'm aware that much of the "client-side" code is executed server-side too, but that's due to Meteor's magically transparent client-side framework.

ollerac 15y ago
I'm not sure about Meteor, but you may want to look into SocketStream. Last time I checked they were very interested in making web APIs easier to develop.
geoffschmidt 15y ago
Hey, one of the Meteor authors here. Meteor's architecture makes it super easy to make an API. It's one of the advantages of building your architecture around sending data around rather than HTML. We couldn't go into everything in the video (it was already too long!), but the piece you're missing is Meteor.methods(). This lets you define methods, which are functions that the client can invoke on the server by calling Meteor.call(). If you choose to also ship the code for these methods to the client (it's optional) then you'll get full latency compensation like we talk about in the video. (This means that Meteor can latency-compensate arbitrarily complex functions, like "read this record, then add 2 to X if this field is false, else create a new record Y.") In fact, every Meteor app already has an API :) Your Meteor client can connect to any other Meteor server by calling Meteor.connect(), and can then subscribe to any realtime datasets that that server is publishing, or invoke any methods available on that server. This is done with a protocol called DDP, but we could map DDP to REST fairly easily.
- binarymax 15y ago
  Thanks. What does DDP stand for? I found several possible definitions.

pennyblack 15y ago

..and this is how people create hype. now downvote me.

zinkem 15y ago

This is built with Node.js. From the docs: "A Meteor application is a mix of JavaScript that runs inside a client web browser, JavaScript that runs on the Meteor server inside a Node.js container..."

luigi 15y ago
I know. I meant that Node.js itself wasn't the fundamental leap that this is. And previous frameworks based on Node haven't attained "The One" status either.
tlrobinson 15y ago
I think he's saying this could be the Rails of Node.js. Node.js is very low level and is more analogous to Ruby than Rails.
- tibbon 15y ago
  Or Node.js == Rack? Something like that. Agreed.

kika 15y ago

I felt that way when I first learned about Kanso JS.

deleted 15y ago

[deleted]

wonnage 15y ago

Interested to see how they'll handle file uploads, authentication, etc. Especially authentication, seeing as clients have full access to the database right now.