Mr. Kruse, I'd like to take a minute to respond to your well thought out post. Item 6 is the only one I think I can speak authoritatively on.
I'm a msdn.microsoft.com/vfoxpro/ Visual Foxpro developer working at a multi location clinic developing intranet applications that fill the gaps left by our commercial software. While Foxpro is not traditionally a web app, I use a http://www.west-wind.com server side framework that is a joy to use. When it came to a client side framework, my choices were not so clear cut. At first I searched for specific widgets. Tabs, ajax, panels, etc. I ended up with 30+ javascript files in my html. Side note: Yeah I know, bad programmer, no donuts. Anyways, while looking for one that does it all I tried moo, prototype, scriptaculous (sp?), and YUI. None of them spoke to me as a programmer. jQuery was the only one that had it all. And to boot, a community unlike any other. I did more with jQuery in one afternoon then I could any of the other javascript frameworks. To be fair, I even tried your ajax toolbox and was left scratching my head. jQuery makes my sites come alive faster, easier, and cleaner then ever before. I think the logic of it will make it very easy for your team, no matter their background. Good luck on your future projects. Shaun Kester SKfox.net Matt Kruse wrote: > > Finally, can anyone comment on introducing jQuery into a team of web > developers with low to moderate javascript experience, building webapps or > web sites that could run into the millions of dollars? Is jQuery robust > enough and easy enough to deploy that it's an easy win? > -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/jQuery-Design-Decisions--Comparison-to-MooTools--tf3218550.html#a8949022 Sent from the JQuery mailing list archive at Nabble.com. _______________________________________________ jQuery mailing list [email protected] http://jquery.com/discuss/
