I too moved to Aurelia.. And I'm loving it!
On 22 October 2016 at 11:10, Corneliu I. Tusnea <corne...@acorns.com.au>
wrote:
> > Rob Eisenberg worked on Angular2 (and Caliburn*). He likes his
> conventions.
> Yeah, really smart guy. I like his conventions :)
>
> Who the f*** could come up with this syntax?
>
> - *ngFor
> - [(ngModel)]=
> - [model]=
> - {{model}}
> - (click)=
> - *ngIf
> - [class.selected]
>
> And the @NgModule redundancies in code are a killer. Why do you need to
> declare the same stuff twice? and sometimes also add it to the constructor?
> Really? Twice ... trice ... ?
> [image: Inline image 2]
>
>
> I mean even PHP now looks sexy :)
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Sat, Oct 22, 2016 at 7:41 AM, Nic Roche <nicro...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>> > moved to Aurelia (www.aurelia.io)
>>
>>
>> Rob Eisenberg worked on Angular2 (and Caliburn*). He likes his
>> conventions.
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------
>> *From:* ozdotnet-boun...@ozdotnet.com <ozdotnet-boun...@ozdotnet.com> on
>> behalf of Corneliu I. Tusnea <corne...@acorns.com.au>
>> *Sent:* Friday, 21 October 2016 9:20 PM
>> *To:* ozDotNet
>> *Subject:* Re: [OT] Angular certification
>>
>> You too Paul?
>>
>> I also gave up on Angular 2 and moved to Aurelia (www.aurelia.io) and I
>> love it.
>> <http://www.aurelia.io/>
>> Home | Aurelia <http://www.aurelia.io/>
>> www.aurelia.io
>> Aurelia is the most powerful, flexible and forward-looking JavaScript
>> client framework in the world.
>>
>>
>> I think Angular 2 has the "done by the big guys syndrome". I don't know
>> anyone (yet) who used Aurelia and ever looked back at A2!
>>
>> On Fri, Oct 21, 2016 at 4:21 PM, Paul Glavich <subscripti...@theglavs.com
>> > wrote:
>>
>>> Gave up on Ang2. I don’t like the direction and the Release process was
>>> silly. Aurelia I find much much better.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> - Glav
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> *From:* ozdotnet-boun...@ozdotnet.com [mailto:ozdotnet-bounces@ozdot
>>> net.com] *On Behalf Of *Nick Randolph
>>> *Sent:* Thursday, 13 October 2016 3:11 PM
>>> *To:* ozDotNet <ozdotnet@ozdotnet.com>
>>> *Subject:* RE: [OT] Angular certification
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> 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).
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> *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@ozdot
>>> net.com <ozdotnet-boun...@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*
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>
--
http://benlaan.com
