3 ms·

I haven't much experience of either framework, but seriously, they're both way too complicated for what they do. Knockout is about the right level of complexit

by moomin 13y ago

I haven't much experience of either framework, but seriously, they're both way too complicated for what they do. Knockout is about the right level of complexity for the problem space, but Angular has the right engineering. But what does it need an IoC implementation for? I'm happy to accept the problem is hard, but I doubt it's so complex it's impossible to decompose.

steveklabnik 13y ago
If you don't have much experience, how do you know they're too complicated?
- moomin 13y ago
  You're right, I'm shooting my mouth off here, but this is the whole problem with these huge frameworks: they're so huge that, by the time you've spent the time to evaluate them properly, your objectivity is likely to be compromised. You'll never see an even handed comparison between the two. This isn't unique to js frameworks. There's plenty of systems like this e.g. Hibernate. At least backbone was small enough that I could seriously evaluate it in a month long project. (For the record, I didn't like it, but at least I actually can have a considered opinion on it without being well past the point of no return.)
ww520 13y ago
I use Knockout, too, and it has served me well. All the computed methods and model change detection are trivial in Knockout.
- kmkemp 13y ago
  Knockout is only about data binding as far as I know, whereas Angular and Ember are full stack SPA frameworks. Also, while I'm a knockout fan, dealing with observables is not ideal when compared with plain old javascript objects that Angular allows you to bind with.
  - moomin 13y ago
    I agree, Angular has the right implementation. It's just not clear that it needs quite so much stuff to solve one problem. And if it isn't solving one problem, why not?
    - Guillaume86 13y ago
      Angular team is going to split the Core into several small modules, hopefully a data-binding module will be available to replace knockout and do nothing more ;)
      - KurtMueller 13y ago
        So what you're saying is they're trying to knockout knockout?

by moomin 13y ago

steveklabnik 13y ago

If you don't have much experience, how do you know they're too complicated?

moomin 13y ago
You're right, I'm shooting my mouth off here, but this is the whole problem with these huge frameworks: they're so huge that, by the time you've spent the time to evaluate them properly, your objectivity is likely to be compromised. You'll never see an even handed comparison between the two. This isn't unique to js frameworks. There's plenty of systems like this e.g. Hibernate. At least backbone was small enough that I could seriously evaluate it in a month long project. (For the record, I didn't like it, but at least I actually can have a considered opinion on it without being well past the point of no return.)

ww520 13y ago

I use Knockout, too, and it has served me well. All the computed methods and model change detection are trivial in Knockout.

kmkemp 13y ago
Knockout is only about data binding as far as I know, whereas Angular and Ember are full stack SPA frameworks. Also, while I'm a knockout fan, dealing with observables is not ideal when compared with plain old javascript objects that Angular allows you to bind with.
- moomin 13y ago
  I agree, Angular has the right implementation. It's just not clear that it needs quite so much stuff to solve one problem. And if it isn't solving one problem, why not?
  - Guillaume86 13y ago
    Angular team is going to split the Core into several small modules, hopefully a data-binding module will be available to replace knockout and do nothing more ;)
    - KurtMueller 13y ago
      So what you're saying is they're trying to knockout knockout?