4 ms·

Anyone done any comparisons of PG/Famo.us with Ionic (http://ionicframework.com/ http://ionicframework.com/)? Seems Ionic is making a really strong case for hyb

by dchuk 12y ago

Anyone done any comparisons of PG/Famo.us with Ionic (http://ionicframework.com/ http://ionicframework.com/)? Seems Ionic is making a really strong case for hybrid app viability

thomasfl 12y ago
Ionic seems to be easy if you know some AngularJS, but I would really like to know how stable and quick these things are.
brianchu 12y ago
AFAIK Ionic isn't specifically engineered for performance. Famo.us is more low-level.
- dchuk 12y ago
  I'm almost positive that native-feeling performance is the core objective of Ionic
rahimnathwani 12y ago
malandrew replied when I asked this question before: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8009282 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8009282
kgc 12y ago
I have used Ionic in the past. It is terribly slow and glitchy on Android. (It was ok on iOS.)
- yesimahuman 12y ago
  (creator here). It definitely sucked on Android in the beginning, and that's on us. Some of the things we were doing on Android were subtly killing performance. But we spent a ton of time focusing on Android and fixing that, so I hope you'll take another look!
yesimahuman 12y ago
(one of the Ionic creators here). The focus right now is definitely different for us vs famo.us. We are focusing on building tools for the future of web standards instead of eschewing it for a custom solution. I just don't think that's going to be the right approach in the future (see Flash). I also think requiring a 3D development background to build 2D apps is unnecessary (unless you are building 3D games or apps, then go for it!) I think the community agrees. Collectively they've started hundreds of thousands of apps this year and are installing our SDK at a rapidly growing rate. One of the benefits they see is a small learning curve, much closer parity with their existing web code, ability to have designers or non JS hackers contribute, and access to tons of existing resources for Angular development.
- malandrew 12y ago
  I normally hesitate to respond like this, but this comment is pure unadulterated self-promotion and FUD that does not belong on HN. (1) The web standards that you speak of are currently as much a standard as what we are doing at Famo.us. Web Components, as they exist today and as is being promoted by/using Angular/Polymer/Material, is merely an idea in the guise of a standard. Google is the only one really promoting it as such and they got a lot of flak early this year from the Safari and Opera teams over their intent to ship the feature half baked and without consensus support from the other browser makers [0]. Until at least two major browser makers fully implement something and properly document it, it's not a web standard. (2) There is no requirement to know about 3D development unless you plan on incorporating 3D effects into your app. All the 2D math/development we know and love today is merely an elevation view into a 3D world. You can use famo.us using all your 2D experience without ever really needing to understand 3D math/development. Furthermore, many of the interfaces widgets already available in famous and being created by the famo.us community are sufficiently high-level that the API should be enough to manipulate/modify that widget without any 3D knowledge. Only if you want to be a creator of 3D widgets or design higher order 3D compositions do you have to learn 3D development. Most developers will use famo.us the same way they use the web today (at least for now). i.e. 2D with occasional "Z-index" manipulations. Eventually some will explore what they can do with 3D since it's available [1]. Famo.us always leaves that option open unlike pretty much all other frameworks. (3) I don't think the community agrees on anything just yet. If you look at the numbers, there are a lot of ideas out there with varying degrees of traction. Things could really not be more fragmented. It's going to be a long time before any framework is declared a winner in this area (if any). Even if a framework is ahead today, history is littered with frameworks that have fallen out of favor like prototype.js, script.aculo.us, YUI and MooTools. Any real student of computing history will be wise to remember Brooks: "No silver bullet"[2] My suggestion to the OP is to install both and try them out to see how they are different. disclaimer: I work at famo.us [0] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2014Feb/0103.html http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2014Feb/0103.h... [1] http://alistapart.com/article/the-z-axis-designing-for-the-future http://alistapart.com/article/the-z-axis-designing-for-the-f... [2] http://faculty.salisbury.edu/~xswang/research/papers/serelated/no-silver-bullet.pdf http://faculty.salisbury.edu/~xswang/research/papers/serelat...

by dchuk 12y ago

Anyone done any comparisons of PG/Famo.us with Ionic (http://ionicframework.com/ http://ionicframework.com/)? Seems Ionic is making a really strong case for hybrid app viability

thomasfl 12y ago

Ionic seems to be easy if you know some AngularJS, but I would really like to know how stable and quick these things are.

brianchu 12y ago

AFAIK Ionic isn't specifically engineered for performance. Famo.us is more low-level.

dchuk 12y ago
I'm almost positive that native-feeling performance is the core objective of Ionic

rahimnathwani 12y ago

malandrew replied when I asked this question before: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8009282 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8009282

kgc 12y ago

I have used Ionic in the past. It is terribly slow and glitchy on Android. (It was ok on iOS.)

yesimahuman 12y ago
(creator here). It definitely sucked on Android in the beginning, and that's on us. Some of the things we were doing on Android were subtly killing performance. But we spent a ton of time focusing on Android and fixing that, so I hope you'll take another look!

yesimahuman 12y ago

(one of the Ionic creators here). The focus right now is definitely different for us vs famo.us. We are focusing on building tools for the future of web standards instead of eschewing it for a custom solution. I just don't think that's going to be the right approach in the future (see Flash). I also think requiring a 3D development background to build 2D apps is unnecessary (unless you are building 3D games or apps, then go for it!) I think the community agrees. Collectively they've started hundreds of thousands of apps this year and are installing our SDK at a rapidly growing rate. One of the benefits they see is a small learning curve, much closer parity with their existing web code, ability to have designers or non JS hackers contribute, and access to tons of existing resources for Angular development.

malandrew 12y ago
I normally hesitate to respond like this, but this comment is pure unadulterated self-promotion and FUD that does not belong on HN. (1) The web standards that you speak of are currently as much a standard as what we are doing at Famo.us. Web Components, as they exist today and as is being promoted by/using Angular/Polymer/Material, is merely an idea in the guise of a standard. Google is the only one really promoting it as such and they got a lot of flak early this year from the Safari and Opera teams over their intent to ship the feature half baked and without consensus support from the other browser makers [0]. Until at least two major browser makers fully implement something and properly document it, it's not a web standard. (2) There is no requirement to know about 3D development unless you plan on incorporating 3D effects into your app. All the 2D math/development we know and love today is merely an elevation view into a 3D world. You can use famo.us using all your 2D experience without ever really needing to understand 3D math/development. Furthermore, many of the interfaces widgets already available in famous and being created by the famo.us community are sufficiently high-level that the API should be enough to manipulate/modify that widget without any 3D knowledge. Only if you want to be a creator of 3D widgets or design higher order 3D compositions do you have to learn 3D development. Most developers will use famo.us the same way they use the web today (at least for now). i.e. 2D with occasional "Z-index" manipulations. Eventually some will explore what they can do with 3D since it's available [1]. Famo.us always leaves that option open unlike pretty much all other frameworks. (3) I don't think the community agrees on anything just yet. If you look at the numbers, there are a lot of ideas out there with varying degrees of traction. Things could really not be more fragmented. It's going to be a long time before any framework is declared a winner in this area (if any). Even if a framework is ahead today, history is littered with frameworks that have fallen out of favor like prototype.js, script.aculo.us, YUI and MooTools. Any real student of computing history will be wise to remember Brooks: "No silver bullet"[2] My suggestion to the OP is to install both and try them out to see how they are different. disclaimer: I work at famo.us [0] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2014Feb/0103.html http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2014Feb/0103.h... [1] http://alistapart.com/article/the-z-axis-designing-for-the-future http://alistapart.com/article/the-z-axis-designing-for-the-f... [2] http://faculty.salisbury.edu/~xswang/research/papers/serelated/no-silver-bullet.pdf http://faculty.salisbury.edu/~xswang/research/papers/serelat...