Hey Will,
* From what I've been reading, vue.js would be much quicker to pick up compared to Angular which has a much steeper learning curve. Vue in its simplest (vanilla JS) form, yes. To do anything more complex, you need to use the Vue CLI/toolchain. Once you hit this point, I find the latest approach in Angular more intuitive… Regards, Nic Roche ________________________________ From: [email protected] <[email protected]> on behalf of William Luu <[email protected]> Sent: Wednesday, November 29, 2017 3:43:45 PM To: ozDotNet Subject: Re: Creating a browser-based product Hi Greg, I've been following this thread a little bit. I'm a bit like you in that I haven't really been keeping up with the latest JS developments and am also looking at creating a new app soon which makes use of one of these new JS frameworks and am heavily leaning towards either React or Vue. I think this article is useful for getting to know what the various pieces of the modern JS world are (and what they do). https://medium.com/the-node-js-collection/modern-javascript-explained-for-dinosaurs-f695e9747b70 >From what I've been reading, vue.js would be much quicker to pick up compared >to Angular which has a much steeper learning curve. Some more reading material: * https://medium.com/corebuild-software/vue-js-and-net-mvc-b5cede228626 * https://laravel-news.com/jquery-vue * https://blog.kloud.com.au/2017/02/14/running-vuejs-on-aspnet-core-apps/ * https://vuejs.org/v2/guide/ * https://vuejs.org/v2/guide/comparison.html >From my understanding, in your ideal world, you want to utilise your existing >knowledge (ASP.NET<http://ASP.NET> MVC etc) and then add on a bit of >JavaScript to make the page more interactive. Of course, this is just my opinion as someone who has no experience in any of these modern JS frameworks. I've chatted with a few guys who have experience with all 3, and their general consensus these days is towards Vue and React over Angular. Will On 17 November 2017 at 09:14, Greg Keogh <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: Folks, we have a serious decision to make about the future directions of our 10 year old Silverlight product that is in wide use in some big companies. I told the boss I'd poll this forum for advice, so I'd really appreciate serious comments from people in-the-know. The large companies using the Silverlight product are now locking down security, so Internet Explorer is being banned and Edge adopted, which means Silverlight is out (some employees are already being forced to use the product from home). Our product is available as Xamarin authored tablet and phone apps for three platforms, but they won't even allow our apps on their company devices. So for the first time we are forced to produce a "browser based" version of our product, which apparently is acceptable to their security policies and audits. Here are some issues swirling in my head: * The backend services to drive the product are established. * The UIs of other product versions are explorer (master-detail) style, so it would be nice to maintain that feel in the browser. * We have to display data in Excel-like tables and a variety of charts (the richer and more interactive the better). * Should we use server-side ASP.NET<http://ASP.NET> Web Forms or MVC to drive it? * Should it be browser-side SPA? (you know I hate JS everything, so there is personal resistance there). * Could server-side and browser-side be combined to produce a better hybrid experience? Are there things to help you do that? * There are development platforms such as GTK and many others I guess that I'm not familiar with. Are they viable? * Other issues I'm forgetting? I'm personally familiar with ASP.NET<http://ASP.NET> Web Forms and MVC, but not with quality JS, layout or styling. Perhaps I could write a black-and-white skeleton of the working product and then give it to someone to style and script (I have done that once before). So in summary (I know this is a very broad question) ... if you were in my position, how would you proceed to produce a browser based version of a product? Cheers, Greg K
