I'm not sure what to make of this article. I think we can all get behind the idea that the ongoing "which framework is better" debate is often pretty ridiculou

I'm not sure what to make of this article. I think we can all get behind the idea that the ongoing "which framework is better" debate is often pretty ridiculous. Different frameworks are clearly better suited for different tasks. But I can't really get behind the author's stance that it is wrong for people to have preferences (even strong ones) about which javascript frameworks they like to use. For one, while every framework likely has different strengths, that isn't the same thing as all frameworks actually being good. It is very possible that an intelligent person with great intentions could write a framework that simply falls short of other frameworks in so many important regards that you can't really consider it "good". It is also possible that a framework will have such a niche use that most people would not benefit from using it. Additionally, while not every project has the same sorts of requirements that could be satisfied with a single javascript framework, most are. Most apps that are being built in the startup community these days are basically little more than user interfaces to some REST api. Some may take it a step further and go "realtime" by using web sockets, but the application doesn't differ significantly from a REST based equivalent. If multiple frameworks set out to solve common problems, then I don't think it is ridiculous at all to compare them and maintain a preference. One way or another, I think we can all agree that the title "Client-Side Frameworks Suck" is total link-bait that does not adequately describe the article itself. To be fair though, I did not watch his talk, so it is very possible that this title better describes the contents of the talk itself.