4 ms·

Thank you for your peaceful tone (unlike the author's). But I think there are a lot of opinions mixed up with your facts: >The sad thing about Rails is it larg

by neya 13y ago

Thank you for your peaceful tone (unlike the author's). But I think there are a lot of opinions mixed up with your facts: >The sad thing about Rails is it largely stagnated for some time >You just have to do so much glueing >These are solved problems on node And to be clear, Node is not a 100% perfect platform either. >I think the author is attempting to elude to the cargo-cult that hit Rails will migrate to Meteor. Of all the options available, why Meteor? Like someone on this thread said, it has a lot more evolving to do, to even become on par with rails in the current situation. We're talking about the basic reason why people choose rails: Productivity (Getting stuff done) and getting your product out to the market. I think in this perspective nothing beats rails: rails new blog rails generate scaffold Post title:string text:text rails s How many lines of actual code I have written so far to actually get my basic blog idea up and running? None.

1qaz2wsx3edc 13y ago
> And to be clear, Node is not a 100% perfect platform either. Absolutely. But as a software piece, I think it can apply itself to the web more easily than Ruby currently can. > Of all the options available, why Meteor? Right, there are plenty of options, MEAN is getting nicely popularized. You also have Derby. > Like someone on this thread said, it has a lot more evolving to do, to even become on par with rails in the current situation. Yea, there's a problem with how much you get for free with Rails (rubygems), and how much utility a framework provides you (AR, generators, etc). Right now those are areas that need improvement, but the community & time will improve those. Re the awesomeness of generators: Yea, meteor doesn't have any, and in all fairness we're talking about something that isn't 1.0, but from a practical point of view: this is an easy task in Meteor and would only take 5-10 lines of code. On something that rails doesn't have is dependency reloading. So imagine a world without `bundle install`. Meteor wants to streamline, it just hasn't gotten all the corner cases yet. It's still early, but it's still got a lot of bang for it's buck. Perhaps some are jumping ship early or just want to get acclimated with new software in it's infancy. I just like both.
- ezequiel-garzon 13y ago
  What is MEAN? It's particularly hard to Google, even with additional keywords.
  - taude 13y ago
    The Mean Stack: MongoDB, Express JS, AngularJS, and NodeJS [1] [1] http://blog.mongodb.org/post/49262866911/the-mean-stack-mongodb-expressjs-angularjs-and http://blog.mongodb.org/post/49262866911/the-mean-stack-mong...
  - deleted 13y ago
    [deleted]
  - drewsdesign 13y ago
    Mongo, Express, Angular, Node http://www.mean.io/ http://www.mean.io/
- dham 13y ago
  First you say > . You just have to do so much glueing In your previous post. Then you list out MEAN(Mongo, Express, Angular, Node), which is all glueing. I have used this stack extensively, and I must say its not even close to Rails. In fact it's not even on the same planet. After all you guys finish your piddly todo lists, start trying to write some real business logic in Node, and see how far it gets you. There is a reason the Meteor team chose fibers. You can async.waterfall all you want but structuring your code in a synchronous manner, lets you get stuff done. People tout Node and Meteor for real time stuff. I could do similar things with SSE and Rails/Ember or Angular. The users of your applications don't care if you use Websockets and really most of the time you don't even need Websockets, you just need SSE or long polling.
  - jaegerpicker 13y ago
    Yes because no one has built real business logic in node.js. and clearly node.js is only good for piddly todo lists. I've worked with python/Django, rails, and node.js on real complex apps with huge amounts of business logic built in them. Each one had advantages and disadvantages. I will say that MEAN certainly compared very well to both type of apps once in production. I was more productive in the other two but performance and scaling were far easier on node. You like rails, that's great but if you dismiss node and other approaches that's your loss. You'll be a poorer developer for it.

by neya 13y ago

1qaz2wsx3edc 13y ago

> And to be clear, Node is not a 100% perfect platform either. Absolutely. But as a software piece, I think it can apply itself to the web more easily than Ruby currently can. > Of all the options available, why Meteor? Right, there are plenty of options, MEAN is getting nicely popularized. You also have Derby. > Like someone on this thread said, it has a lot more evolving to do, to even become on par with rails in the current situation. Yea, there's a problem with how much you get for free with Rails (rubygems), and how much utility a framework provides you (AR, generators, etc). Right now those are areas that need improvement, but the community & time will improve those. Re the awesomeness of generators: Yea, meteor doesn't have any, and in all fairness we're talking about something that isn't 1.0, but from a practical point of view: this is an easy task in Meteor and would only take 5-10 lines of code. On something that rails doesn't have is dependency reloading. So imagine a world without `bundle install`. Meteor wants to streamline, it just hasn't gotten all the corner cases yet. It's still early, but it's still got a lot of bang for it's buck. Perhaps some are jumping ship early or just want to get acclimated with new software in it's infancy. I just like both.

ezequiel-garzon 13y ago
What is MEAN? It's particularly hard to Google, even with additional keywords.
- taude 13y ago
  The Mean Stack: MongoDB, Express JS, AngularJS, and NodeJS [1] [1] http://blog.mongodb.org/post/49262866911/the-mean-stack-mongodb-expressjs-angularjs-and http://blog.mongodb.org/post/49262866911/the-mean-stack-mong...
- deleted 13y ago
  [deleted]
- drewsdesign 13y ago
  Mongo, Express, Angular, Node http://www.mean.io/ http://www.mean.io/
dham 13y ago
First you say > . You just have to do so much glueing In your previous post. Then you list out MEAN(Mongo, Express, Angular, Node), which is all glueing. I have used this stack extensively, and I must say its not even close to Rails. In fact it's not even on the same planet. After all you guys finish your piddly todo lists, start trying to write some real business logic in Node, and see how far it gets you. There is a reason the Meteor team chose fibers. You can async.waterfall all you want but structuring your code in a synchronous manner, lets you get stuff done. People tout Node and Meteor for real time stuff. I could do similar things with SSE and Rails/Ember or Angular. The users of your applications don't care if you use Websockets and really most of the time you don't even need Websockets, you just need SSE or long polling.
- jaegerpicker 13y ago
  Yes because no one has built real business logic in node.js. and clearly node.js is only good for piddly todo lists. I've worked with python/Django, rails, and node.js on real complex apps with huge amounts of business logic built in them. Each one had advantages and disadvantages. I will say that MEAN certainly compared very well to both type of apps once in production. I was more productive in the other two but performance and scaling were far easier on node. You like rails, that's great but if you dismiss node and other approaches that's your loss. You'll be a poorer developer for it.