[bikamonki]

I see a trend here, I'm also solving most cases with no-backend solutions. In your opinion, what would be the downside of Firebase? Did you have to work-around any limitation? Also, did you try Backbonejs as well? Can you compare it to Angularjs? I am thinking about giving Angularjs a go but would like an opinion from someone who's already using it in prod.

[dqdo]

There are two downsides to Firebase. The first one being price. For certain applications (e.g., photo sharing app) it does not make sense to use Firebase due to the high cost of storage. I would just use AWS in this case. The second downside is that it takes longer to run SQL-like search queries on the data. Depending upon your application, this might be important and Firebase does not do this well. What Firebase is good at is make the development process very quick and for real-time applications the set-up is much simpler than web-sockets.

I have tried both Backbone JS and Angular JS and in my opinion, I like Angular's separation between the front-end html and the model. Reading through Angular is much faster than reading through Backbone code because Angular is very opinionated. I like opinionated frameworks and languages (e.g., Python) because if there is only one right way to do something, it simplifies the code greatly. Some people don't like Angular due this structured approach and opt for Backbone. As for performance, there really hasn't been any problems with Angular and Firebase. I am not sure where the complaints about performance comes from.

And just one last comment. I augment AngularJS with Jquery and Lodash. For some functionalities, I like to work directly in Jquery or Javascript rather than use the Angular method. I find this much simpler than stick 100% with Angular and in order to keep this logic clean, I keep the Angular and Jquery code separate.