Is Angular 2.0 ready?

Facebook open sources things they use in production. So i always believe they keep their words. That's the difference :)

Is that official? I get no indication from the site whatsoever , plus the page points to https://twitter.com/juanmacuevas!

Don't forget the Large Hadron Collider http://hasthelargehadroncolliderdestroyedtheworldyet.com/

Not true, I still get recruiting emails every week asking for angular experience, which means there is probably a huge group of people locked into the angular framework, and since 2.0 will be backwards compatible, I'm sure a decent amount of people will be switching their angular 1.0 apps to 2.0. It will be easier then converting a whole angular stack to React and figuring out all of the other React libraries and frameworks you need to use.

Learning all of the libraries and frameworks for React is quite complex and not less complex then learning Angular 2.0. with its backwards compatible support.

From looking at the Angular 2 alpha, design documents, etc., it looks to end up with considerably less accidental complexity (from an application developer point of view) than version 1, and it has a lot of ideas under the hood which are reminiscent of React.

I think the most visible difference will remain that React is code centric, with templates as a sort of special case of code. Angular (1, 2) is more explicitly divided between code and template.

I believe the main driver in choosing between them will not be technical, but cultural. There are many organizations where considerable value is ascribed to the notion of code versus template, such organizations might lean toward Angular (especially in version 2) over React and friends.

Honestly, there are plenty of other options out there besides Angular and even React, despite the tremendous hype around it at the moment.

Aurelia seems to be the best ideas from Angular + the best ideas from the creator's previous framework, Durandal, in one framework with much cleaner syntax and much less complexity than both Angular & Angular 2.0.

Ember has made some big updates recently, rewriting their rendering engine to use a virtual DOM.

A lot of people still seem to really like Meteor.

Mercury, Mithril, Ractive, JSBlocks, etc. are all smaller, lesser known projects with a lot of potential.

React is not a framework...

Yes, the future will be web components, which would mean Polymer / x-tag until the spec is in all modern browsers. React will die when web components don't need polyfills.

React never solved the architecture issue. With Angular 1.x and dependency injection , it solved that problem for you. React is just a view layer.

It looks that way in the long run, although there will be a period where tutorials for Angular 1 will be superior to those for Angular 2.

Angular 2 looks way easier to understand. That is from the perspective of someone just starting out. Although note alot of things changes in Angular 2. So some tutorials may be out of date.

There are more resources about Angular 1.x obviously.

What might be confusing is the whole AtScript/Typescript/Javascript thing.

I never found Angular 1.x difficult, but it's a bit like Rails, people might have the impression that they can learn the framework without learning the language at first place. Ultimately 1.x was limited by ES5 itself. That's what it was a bit confusing sometimes, especially with all the scopes and contexts stuff.

I found this video that compares doing some common operations in Angular 1, Angular 2 and Aurelia:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rLuuAlDXHU0

It's fairly recent too: August 3 2015.

In theory it will be. In practice, not yet because the documentation has a lot of gaps and error messages aren't that good yet. Still, I'm liking it. (I'm trying out the Dart version.)

Because not everybody will upgrade to Angular 2.0 if there is no need. So the people who know Angular 1.* will be fine.

Even if Angular 2.0 is not backwards compatible, it doesn't mean that once Angular 2.0 comes out that all of Angular 1.x is no longer useable. I'd imagine 1.x will be used for a long time to come. Also, having a good idea of Angular 1.x especially 1.4 will prepare people a lot for 2.0.

I don't think it is. Also, isn't that sort of the deal with semantic versioning, i.e. a change in the major version # mean there are breaking changes?

Because Angular 1.x has a long term support plan in place that should see maintenance provided to the framework for at least a couple of years after Angular 2 drops. Another major component of that plan is building out a compatibility layer between Angular 1 and Angular 2.

For more information on that plan, see here: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1xvBZoFuNq9hsgRhPPZOJC-Z4...

Why are you looking for jobs that specifically require Angular?

You'd be better off in the long run looking for jobs that require Javascript knowledge and are familiar with at least one current framework. Those are the types of companies who will be more likely to upgrade their stack as technology progresses.

Because it was hyped, and was chosen for some project on the hype alone, without anybody bothering to check what is all about and how the future with it will look like.

It will be possible to write Angular 2 and Angular 1 code as part of the same application.

http://www.effectiveui.com/blog/2015/04/20/learned-ng-conf-w...

Enyo was/is an amazing web component framework, but I think the whole HP webOS debacle pretty much scared people away from adopting it, due to uncertainties about it's future ownership and development. I believe it's still in use in the LG webOS TV SDK, at least.