Hacker News Reader

Comment by madrobby | Hacker News Reader

It's marketed as a silver bullet.

Here are some snippets from the ember.js Homepage: "Write dramatically less code", "Don't waste time", "Ember.js is built for productivity".

View on HN

If you're building the kind of app that Ember is designed for, all of the above will be true. But we never anywhere claim that Ember is the right solution for every webapp. There's a definite type of app that doesn't benefit from Ember and I'll happily tell people that. There are also other simple widget based apps where I think Backbone is a good option.

Ember is not marketed as being for a specific type of app, and not for others. The sole hint to kind of app is "ambitious apps." As a reader, that seems like a challenge. Oh, I don't think ember is right for me? Must not be ambitious. Nowhere on the site that I can see is there a discussion of fit, or tradeoffs.

I'm not attacking Ember specifically. All the MVC frameworks' sites are the same in this regard: breathless boosterism, slathered in benefit-speke.

Hence the perception that it's a silver bullet.

That's a good point. We probably should add a section on helping users decide whether Ember is a good fit for their goals. While there's obviously some disagreement in this area, we can at least make it clear what sort of apps we intend Ember to be used for.

That would be a great move.

Basic Marketing 101: if you try to attract everyone, you will inevitably get a lot of people for whom the product is not ideal, and then they will be angry. And then there will be backlash.

Better to build your fences and make them clear so people are educated, instead of seduced.

You're quoting from the Ember website but your bad experience was with Backbone.js. In fact, Ember is designed to avoid the kind of deficiencies you hit in Backbone. Sounds like you should give Ember a try in your next app. ;)

Reply on news.ycombinator.com