3 ms·
I think that's the point, I think Angular is easier also. But once you've mastered Ember, what you can do with Ember in a timeframe, greatly exceeds that of Ang
by dubcanada 13y ago
I think that's the point, I think Angular is easier also. But once you've mastered Ember, what you can do with Ember in a timeframe, greatly exceeds that of Angular. It's extremely powerful.
- hijk 13y agoHuh, that's an interesting perspective. What makes it more powerful? Is it a higher level of abstraction thing, like PG suggests makes one language more powerful than another?
- dodyg 13y agoThis kind of reaction reminds me of the early days of Rails and Django.
- hijk 13y agoAh, the good old days…
- laureny 13y agoLet's not go there again, shall we? My personal story is that while I liked Ember, it lacked a bunch of other things that were painful to find elsewhere and integrate with Ember (such as includes). I switched to AngularJS because it gives me all this (and many more) out of the box. Still, I'm not going to start preaching that AngularJS "greatly exceeds Ember".
- kanja 13y agoBecause it doesn't - here's a great article examining the scope of the two. http://eviltrout.com/2013/06/15/ember-vs-angular.html http://eviltrout.com/2013/06/15/ember-vs-angular.html It's great to make the decision to focus on simplicity over scope - that's a good, defensible choice and I don't think anyone here will fault you for it. But an honest understanding of the extra features you gave up to make that choice will go a long way.