Hacker News Reader

Comment by richcollins | Hacker News Reader

Rails was created to make web applications like Basecamp. I think Seaside was probably a better choice for web applications.

Now that client side frameworks like Cappucino and SproutCore exist, I don't really see the point in using Rails or Seaside.

I would recommend Merb as a replacement for dynamic, content-driven sites that people currently use PHP for.

View on HN

Now that client side frameworks like Cappucino and SproutCore exist, I don't really see the point in using Rails or Seaside.

Why would a javascript client framework remove the need for a backend?

Because most of the work for Seaside (and to a similar extent Rails) is in managing user interface state. That goes away with client side frameworks. At least most of the messy complex stuff - obviously persistence things are still kinda handy ;)

Its back to the future.

When you have worked with both you find that the back end stuff just gets in the way for the rich client frameworks. Its not to say that "classic" action/restful style web apps don't have a place (they have a BIG place, especially for content heavy sites) but its not a one size fits all.

You still need a backend, just not a complicated framework. The backend for my Cappuccino application does not have to manage any UI state. It just reads and writes to a db.

Rails is perfect for building that.. that's what we're using it for on my current start-up.

>Now that client side frameworks like Cappucino and SproutCore exist, I don't really see the point in using Rails or Seaside.

Couldn't agree more. Impressed daily with Cappuccino.

Yeah. The irony is that server-side frameworks really started to get good just before most of their functionality migrated back to the client.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com