You know, I'm just going to say it: Angular is the Rails of Javascript. That probably sounds like a derogation. But behold: I offer nuance! They're both big

You know, I'm just going to say it: Angular is the Rails of Javascript. That probably sounds like a derogation. But behold: I offer nuance! They're both big and powerful, and capable of rewarding dedicated study with enormous power. Thus they develop a devoted following whose members often do things lesser mortals find little short of wizardry. They're also both built to be friendly and welcoming to the newcomer, and offer a relatively short and comfortable path from zero to basic productivity. Thus they trigger the "I made a thing!" reward mechanism which excites newbies and leaves them thirsting for more. They also, in order to go from newbie to wizard, involve a learning curve like the north face of K2. In both cases, it's a necessary consequence of the design decisions on which the platform is based, and those decisions, by and large, have sensible reasons behind them -- not, I hasten to note, decisions with which everyone will (or should) agree, but decisions which can be reasonably defended. But that doesn't make it a good thing. When people start off with "I made a thing!" and then run smack into a sheer wall of ice and granite, initial excitement very often turns into frustration and even rage, as on display in some comments here in this very thread. (I hasten again to add that I'm not judging anyone for being frustrated and angry over hitting that wall -- indeed, to do so would make me a hypocrite, given my reaction to hitting that wall with Rails a year or so ago.) Further compounding the issue is that, often enough, wizards who've forgotten the travails of their ascent will condescend to say things like "Well, what's so hard? Just read {this book,that blog post,&c.} and it's all right there." Well, sure, for wizards, who are well accustomed to interpreting one another's cryptic aides-memoire. For those of us still toiling our way up the hill, not so much. I will note, though, that while I hit that wall (hard!) with Rails, and in the end couldn't make it up, I haven't had the same problem with Angular. The sole significant difference I can identify, between the two attempts, is this: When I took on Rails, there was no one else in the organization who knew (or should've known) the first thing about the platform. When I had a problem with Rails, I faced it all alone, with only my Google-fu, my source-diving skills, and my perseverance on which to rely. For a while I did well, but in the long run, for all but the most exceptional engineers, such expenditure of personal resource without resupply becomes unsustainable. When I take on Angular, I do so with the support of a large team, composed of the most brilliant and capable engineers among whom I have ever had the privilege of working. When I have a problem with Angular, I have a dozen people at my back, at least one of whom is all but guaranteed to have encountered the exact same situation previously -- or, if not this precise permutation, then something very like it, from which experience more often than not comes precisely the advice I need to hear, to guide me in the direction of a solution. Of course, whether this is really useful to anyone is an open question; I think it's a little facile, at least, to say "Oh, if you're having Angular problems, all you have to do is find a team of amazing people who mostly all have years of Angular experience, and work with them!" But, at the very least, if you're going to be fighting through the whole thing all by your onesome, maybe think about picking up a less comprehensive but more comprehensible framework, instead.