[igl]

Everything about Meteor reads like a marketing article.

How about:

- It defines global variables. - The documentation is full of red warning messages and "this will be easier in the future" - The code is pretty unorganized and has some wild pieces in there. - do any of your friends use/heard of meteor?

[matthewmacleod]

I don't think that's fair at all.

The whole point of Meteor is to play with different approaches to web development that will be required in the future (if you want to build big distributed, interactive web apps). It's not finished yet, and they're pretty upfront about that.

[cmelbye]

I'm curious, what part of Meteor will be a requirement for future web development? Are we not already building big distributed, interactive web apps without using techniques that Meteor introduced?

[sferoze]

Currently, I don't think Meteor's main advantage is bringing new capabilities, but rather providing a platform for building modern web apps.

So it is different than any one javascript framework in that it's goal is to bring together a complete set of technologies that are needed to build an app, rather than the developer joining different pieces themselves.

Currently many developers work with separate multiple frameworks, and Meteor brings them together into a cohesive, power, clean API.

Meteor is amazing, and even with the rough edges, and evolving API, it is still a joy to work with. They are thinking about the big picture and it really allows the developer to focus more on the creative aspects of your app. I am excited to see Meteor evolve over time.

[mark_l_watson]

I can't agree. I used Meteor to rewrite an app that I had previously used Clojure and Clojurescript for.

It is faster to rewrite an app having written it once already, but still: it took half the time, had better user login/auth, and had sort-of real time multi-user support.

Meteor is very nice. Try it on a small project. The learning curve is easy.

[jcrotor]

What about when it becomes mildly popular and you have to rewrite it again because it isn't cost effective to scale at all? It isn't time saved, it is time wasted.

People that don't or haven't tried to understand node.js or express like meteor. Picking up meteor is easier, but its not all that useful at the moment. There are other frameworks that are better than meteor and allow you to achieve the same end (realtime).

Don't get me wrong, it is neat, and I am glad they are exploring a new area of development, but promoting it as anything other than a pet project is misleading.

[mark_l_watson]

Hello jcrotor. I think that a Meteor app could easily handle hundreds of simultaneous connections on a very small server.

Meteor is for writing highly interactive/reactive applications and I don't know if it is even meant for massive scaling.

There is a sweet spot for Meteor for apps that will not have millions of users.