On Thu, Oct 13, 2016 at 3:10 PM, Nick Randolph <n...@builttoroam.com> wrote:

> We’re just in process of publish an app written in Angular 2, so yes,
> definitely taking it seriously. A lot of pain upgrading from Beta/RC to RTM
> (it’s like they didn’t understand what Beta/RC means).
>

I heard the same thing about .net core. It seems people are just pumping
out stuff too quickly.


>
>
> *Nick Randolph* | *Built to Roam Pty Ltd* | Microsoft MVP – Windows
> Platform Development | +61 412 413 425 | @thenickrandolph |
> skype:nick_randolph
> The information contained in this email is confidential. If you are not
> the intended recipient, you may not disclose or use the information in this
> email in any way. Built to Roam Pty Ltd does not guarantee the integrity of
> any emails or attached files. The views or opinions expressed are the
> author's own and may not reflect the views or opinions of Built to Roam Pty
> Ltd.
>
>
>
> *From:* ozdotnet-boun...@ozdotnet.com [mailto:ozdotnet-bounces@
> ozdotnet.com] *On Behalf Of *Tom P
> *Sent:* Thursday, 13 October 2016 3:05 PM
> *To:* ozDotNet <ozdotnet@ozdotnet.com>
> *Subject:* Re: [OT] Angular certification
>
>
>
> Angular 2 is entirely redone. TypeScript makes it also bearable
>
>
> Thanks
>
> Tom
>
>
>
> On 13 October 2016 at 14:54, Greg Keogh <gfke...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Are there any Angular certifications you guys can recommend that may be
> taken seriously?
>
>
>
> Can anyone even take Angular seriously?!
>
>
>
> I thought it was already abandoned by the author who went off to write a
> new competing BlahJS, or is a new group completely rewriting it to Angular
> 2, or something like that? They all blur together.
>
>
>
> *GK*
>
>
>

Reply via email to