Angular 2.0 shipped this week, two years after announcement. The wait was long, the changes are total, and the reception is mixed. Google rebuilt Angular from scratch—TypeScript, component-based, completely different API. Whether this was right decision depends on who you ask.
What's certain: the two-year rewrite gave React enormous opportunity.
Vue.js 2.0 is in development and coming this year. What started as Evan You's personal project in 2014 has become a legitimate third option alongside React and Angular. Vue's growth, especially in Asia, proves a framework can succeed outside the Facebook/Google ecosystem.
The question is whether Vue's "progressive framework" philosophy is genuinely better or just different.
Two years ago, choosing a JavaScript framework felt like Russian roulette. Would it survive? Would it change completely? Would something better emerge next month? Starting 2016, those questions feel answerable. The landscape has stabilized enough to make informed choices.
This isn't declaring winners—it's acknowledging that viable options exist and the churn has slowed.
Angular 2 has been in development for over a year, and beta just landed. The reaction is mixed: excitement about modern architecture, frustration about breaking compatibility with Angular 1. Google chose to rebuild rather than evolve, and that decision will define Angular's future.
The question is whether the improvements justify abandoning millions of lines of Angular 1 code.
The JavaScript application landscape is evolving rapidly. Just a few years ago, using JavaScript to build complex single-page applications seemed impractical. Today, we have frameworks competing to provide the best developer experience and most powerful features for building what we once thought impossible in the browser.
I've been exploring Ember.js over the past few months, and I'm impressed by its ambitious approach to solving common problems in JavaScript application development. Unlike minimalist libraries that give you just the basics, Ember provides a comprehensive solution with strong opinions about how applications should be structured. This opinionated approach might not appeal to everyone, but for teams building complex applications, having these decisions made for you can be liberating.
jQuery made manipulating the DOM easy. But as JavaScript applications grow, jQuery alone isn't enough. You end up with spaghetti code – event handlers everywhere, data scattered across the page, no structure.
Backbone.js solves this. Created by Jeremy Ashkenas (also behind CoffeeScript and Underscore.js), Backbone provides structure for JavaScript applications. It's not a full framework like Rails – it's a library that enforces architectural patterns.
PHP is easy to learn. You can build a working website in an afternoon. But as projects grow, PHP code can become messy fast. Files scattered everywhere, SQL mixed with HTML, no structure, impossible to maintain.
This is where PHP frameworks come in. They provide structure, enforce best practices, and include tools that make development faster and more maintainable.