[jf-]

> Angular (their current choice) has, ah, high training costs

Does it? You need to know typescript (which you arguably should be using regardless of frontend framework) and what dependency injection, observables and components are. Plus some syntax for the templating language, which is fairly intuitive. That’s enough to get you going, I don’t see it as being much more of an investment than learning a react stack.

It also has the benefit of being all in one, like .NET, so there aren’t multiple different packages for every function that could be used, depending on who your team is. That all in one factor is probably why it’s a natural complement to .NET.

[Bizarro]

Does it? You need to know typescript (which you arguably should be using regardless of frontend framework)

That's highly debatable. We moved back to ES after using Typescript for years and couldn't be happier. We're much more productive than we were with Typescript, and that's with people that know the language. We get much of the benefits of Typescript by just using a jsconfig.json file in our project and using VSCode. The Typescript language service will typecheck JS code if you want it to.

And there is a big upfront cost for onboarding developers with Typescript and Angular.

[andai]

This is interesting, I'm mostly hearing the opposite experience. What made you decide to make the switch back?

[jf-]

It’s not faster, but it does improve code quality. I also don’t think it’s that hard to learn, but I’m coming from a strongly typed, object orientated background. Like the sibling commenter I’d also be interested in hearing your team’s experiences with it.

[rattray]

> That all in one factor is probably why it’s a natural complement to .NET.

Very much agreed. And I also agree that, at least in a corporate context, training for a React stack would also be expensive, potentially more so.

And there are plenty of people out there who have no problem picking up Angular.

Looking at job market data alone, though, Angular commands a premium to .NET-only. Anecdotally, folks who feel comfortable with .NET, but who find eg; React+Redux bewildering, also feel constantly confused by Angular and can get themselves into trouble without close guidance.

[jf-]

> Anecdotally, folks who feel comfortable with .NET, but who find eg; React+Redux bewildering, also feel constantly confused by Angular and can get themselves into trouble without close guidance.

Makes sense, the modern frontend frameworks are pretty similar anyway, despite the amount of noise about their differences. If you find react hard you’ll probably find angular hard and vice versa.

[jf22]

I think you answered your own question when you mentioned Angular being an "all in one".

Angular needs a bit more training because you are heavily encouraged to do things the "Angular" way which requires a lot of abstraction and componentization.

[jf-]

I was more referring to the essentially mandatory third party packages that you need with react, react router, redux/whatever you please, something for your styles, something for forms etc. With angular you just use what comes out of the box, but either way you have to learn whatever the thing is so the effort seems to be the same. Not sure what you mean about abstraction and componentisation vs other frameworks.

[jf22]

Angular likes when you structure your application a certain way.

You try and tweak how you want to break up a component and the house of cards starts to fall over.

[bryanrasmussen]

I feel house of cards is a very good metaphor for the whole angular ecosystem.

[gitgud]

I agree, the versioning has been a mess and they're constantly breaking changes to the API. Just trying to update a project is like trying to change playing cards in a house of cards...

[jf-]

Unsubstantive. Care to share your thoughts?