[jamies888888]

Who signs off moving huge, billion dollar companies onto immature, "hip" JavaScript frameworks? I don't get it. It's too niche. It's too risky. How are you expected to make hires for specialists in such a niche technology which may or may not be here in a few years?

Do they just hire good JavaScript developers and train them for Ember? And also tell them they may have to retrain in another framework in a couple of years when Ember becomes defunct?

[tragic]

Was it too hip, niche, etc to use Spring for a Java project in 2007? Because that's how old Ember is now.

I don't really get why you're talking as if thick client web apps are some sort of unexplored continent that prudent enterprises should stay away from. Like it or lump it, they've been around for a while and there are now enough of them that they will be around for a long while yet. And if you're going to build one of those, you should use a framework.

[Matthias247]

I'm not into Ember and have no clue how it compares to the other SPA frameworks. But from these political point of view it doesn't look worse than the others. React and Angular might die or change in an unsuitable way even sooner since they are driven by other big companies for their own merits. Maybe extjs or aurelia might be different, since they are maintained by companies which earn their money through this.

The good thing is that if a company is as big as LinkedIn they could probably maintain the framework on their own if it gets out of favor. Of course they could also directly start a new one for their internal use, but it's questionable if this would get any better than the existing ones.

[dbbk]

> Do they just hire good JavaScript developers and train them for Ember?

There is really not a whole lot of Ember-specific training you need to go through. A good JavaScript developer would just have to read through the guides once to grasp its concepts.

[orf]

Ember has been around for a while now, isn't that hip and very stable for a JS framework.