8 Jul 2011 4:28 AM #21
Like I wrote, and I thing it bears repeating, Ext3 doesn't seem especially compatible with FF4/5 and IE9, and Ext4 doesn't seem especially compatible with IE7/8 and FF3. So what are we supposed to do if we need to support all of the above?
8 Jul 2011 4:39 AM #22
- Join Date
- Mar 2007
- DC Area =)
- Vote Rating
8 Jul 2011 5:02 AM #23
I must said that many organizations do not want to go to production with beta third party, and SDK Tools, which is likely involved in most of the applications using Ext JS, is still in Beta.
8 Jul 2011 5:28 AM #24
Sencha is the name of the company, not a product. Why can't people get this correct?!
It is just a reference, we all know what is meant.
The other day I had a person call me about sending me a PSD file and I referred to it as a adobe file ... knowing full well, that it was a Photoshop file, not actually an Adobe file.
I got a lecture on how it was not an Adobe file and that Adobe was the company and Photoshop was the name of the actual program and that he would be sending me a Photoshop file.
I simply had to smile at this young man for setting me straight.
8 Jul 2011 5:53 AM #25
- Join Date
- Mar 2007
- Gainesville, FL
- Vote Rating
I will say one last thing, we want to please everyone but IMO, it will be impossible to do. People wanted things to be stateful by default so we did, guess what, made others unhappy.Mitchell Simoens @SenchaMitch
Sencha Inc, Senior Software Engineer
Check out my GitHub, lots of nice things for Ext JS 4 and Sencha Touch 2
Think my support is good? Get more personalized support via a support subscription. https://www.sencha.com/store/
Need more help with your app? Hire Sencha Services email@example.com
Want to learn Sencha Touch 2? Check out Sencha Touch in Action that is in print!
When posting code, please use BBCode's CODE tags.
8 Jul 2011 6:13 AM #26
We have a huge app written in Ext 3 that we are scheduled to release in the next 6 months. Its an upgrade of an existing web app (not written in Ext) so we already have a large user base. We have a ton of custom classes that extend grid, tree, tab panel etc etc. Lots of custom grid implementations. Upgrading to 4.0 has been a nightmare. At this point we're just holding off for now and hoping that the upgrade process gets improved/made easier and that performance is improved.
Maybe we should just stick to Ext 3 for now and plan our launch around that?
8 Jul 2011 6:27 AM #27
- Join Date
- Nov 2008
- San Diego, Peoples' Republic of California
- Vote Rating
When Ext 3 came out, it had all kinds of issues, too. Speed problems with forms and tabs and so on.
The community here pushed along, reported the bugs, proposed fixes, and got products to market.
Now many of the community who did those things work for Sencha and those who are left aren't providing the help we did for Ext3.
As far as Ext4 goes, it seems to me that Sencha has made a big mistake in not providing backward compatibility. I don't see how anyone who's invested the time and money in building a large Ext3 application can justify the expense of porting to Ext4. If it were a matter of replacing the Ext3 folder with Ext4 and the app runs and there's lots of nifty new stuff to build upon, great!
8 Jul 2011 6:48 AM #28
I agree that not providing backwards compatibility was a big mistake. I know we would have already bought a license + premium support if it was. I'm sure the sales of licenses is not as good as expected since many are holding off plans to do a full port to 4.0. The amount of work involved in moving a large app from 3 to 4 is prohibitive. Not to mention performance issues.
I want to love ExtJs and for the most part I do, and were already committed to it since we've been developing our new app for almost 2 years (yeah its taken longer than expected), and its huge - but now were in a bit of a bind. And the lack of backwards compatibility really sucks.
I was looking forward to the 4.0 release, and now I am considering that we stick with 3.0 for our product launch and then moving to 4.0 down the road.
"Ext JS 4: Faster, Easier, More Stable" - yeah right...
8 Jul 2011 2:16 PM #29
A few thoughts:
1) We did attempt a backwards compatibility layer (see http://www.sencha.com/blog/ext-js-3-to-4-migration/ for a compat file, upgrade guide and videos). Unfortunately, this was a failure because we didn't give it enough attention until too late. We have learned from this and have changed the way we do things, with an emphasis on backwards compatibility from day 1.
2) Sencha did not acquire Ext JS, we simply renamed the company. The company and the product both used to be called Ext JS - once we created another product that no longer made sense. There is no conspiracy theory or external purchaser, it's just a name.
Ext JS 4 has a great architecture and an awesome team behind it, but I won't be truly proud of it until we've corrected the remaining performance issues and further improved our documentation.
When Mitchell mentions his dedication he's not alone. Everyone here works like crazy to create great frameworks but sometimes we don't meet that aim. When that happens it pisses us off too, and we work all the harder to correct it. When we're not as engaged in the forums it's not because we don't care - it's because our heads are down working on the code. That's another balance we're trying to improve.
8 Jul 2011 3:47 PM #30
Ext1->Ext2 was a nightmare - but very much worth it at the time when our product was in its infancy.
Ext2->Ext4 would surely be equally painful if not worse ... another re-write I'm sure! I simply cannot justify the development costs - especially when there are no new features worth having which we couldn't write ourselves.
When one has mission critical products installed in countless large govt agencies and blue-chip companies and the underlying framework does little for backwards compatibility - upgrading is not going to happen anytime soon.
Make the upgrade process as seamless as possible and users will purchase the new version! It's that simple.
All that said, backwards compatibility is the ONLY thing I don't like about Ext. It is a fine product despite this shortcoming and I don't know what I'd do without it!
Thread Participants: 17
- tryanDLS (1 Post)
- firstname.lastname@example.org (2 Posts)
- tjstuart (1 Post)
- brookd (2 Posts)
- vamsee.k (1 Post)
- mitchellsimoens (8 Posts)
- pdchapin (1 Post)
- mschwartz (1 Post)
- edspencer (2 Posts)
- blakel (3 Posts)
- alphadogg (3 Posts)
- dukeyboy (3 Posts)
- scottmartin (1 Post)
- deskwideweb (4 Posts)
- lukefowell89 (1 Post)
- SebTardif (1 Post)
- email@example.com (1 Post)