8 Jul 2011 10:55 PM #31
The main thing is that Sencha needs to polish polish polish polish and just keep on polishing until ext shines like a diamond in every possible way.
I am a refugee from Adobe Flex. Adobe builds Flex stuff and then say "it's finished!" and then it moves on to build the next shiny thing. Adobe does not polish, improve, polish, improve until Flex is best in class. I will never design another Flex app again. It is somewhat disturbing to see Sencha building new and shiny things when clearly ext needs lots and lots and lots more polishing. Animation software and all sorts or other tangents are clearly a drain on resources and focus, which should be going into the core product. What is the CTO of Sencha thinking? I am hoping that Sencha will continue to fix and improve and polish ext until it is the very best in its class, and then polish some more.
The message has to be continually hammered that the documentation of ext remains woefully inadequate, although I and others continually say it, the documentation situation has not been fixed.
For ext to succeed, Sencha has to stop all these distracting side projects like animation, fix the ongoing problem with documentation, and continue to polish ext. Fortunately, it appears at this stage that Sencha/Ed Spencer is continuing to work on ext, whether or not they maintain that focus remains to be seen. I'm hoping for ext to be a viable alternative to Adobe Flex, not yet another half baked, poorly documented, average product with the minimum feature set required to just get the job done.
Did I mention that the ext documentation remains terrible?
8 Jul 2011 11:16 PM #32
9 Jul 2011 12:21 AM #33
I have been following Ext JS development for almost 4 years (right from the days when it was called yui-ext). Along the way I have developed applications that I had to upgrade from 1.x to 2.x to 3.x. For the last few months I was working on a fairly complex single page application that uses lots of grids, tab panels, accordions, etc. I started out with Ext 3.2, then used 3.3. Now I upgraded it to Ext 4.0.2 (planning to move to ext 4.0.4 next week). Before I started the migration to Ext 4.x, I did a complete study of the issues and made a plan for the upgrade. I had to prototype a few of the complex screens (using locking and infinite scrolling) upfront so that I don't hit any surprises. The documentation is not complete, however I am more used to reading the source code than the documentation, so I didn't face any major problems because of lack of documentation. Overall, my observation is that it is worth upgrading to Ext 4.x, however it requires careful planning and prototyping to avoid surprises.
Overall, I would say that Ext JS 4.x is in the right direction and I am confident of deploying my application to production with the current build (though my release is 3 months away, so I am hoping to get some more builds from Sencha before my release :-) ). My advice to people who want to upgrade complex apps to 4.x is this - if you can invest time in prototyping and identifying the bottlenecks, then you can upgrade now, else wait for 4.1 (even then you need to invest time in prototyping, but will face fewer bottlenecks).
9 Jul 2011 1:07 AM #34
It's because ext is so great that it is worth commenting on these things.
It looks great and works great and is getting better all the time.
No competing product can hold a candle to ext.
9 Jul 2011 1:12 AM #35
It's also worthing praising the ext team for actively participating in these forums and for maintaining polite and well mannered attitude.
9 Jul 2011 5:40 AM #36
Also, something that's not been addressed, that I've repeated here twice. Ext3 was not built with IE9 and/or FF 4/5 in mind (we are fixing all sorts of IE9 issues in an Ext3 app). And it doesn't seem Ext4 was built with IE7 in mind. So what then, do we need two different frameworks?
11 Jul 2011 10:34 AM #37Also, something that's not been addressed, that I've repeated here twice. Ext3 was not built with IE9 and/or FF 4/5 in mind (we are fixing all sorts of IE9 issues in an Ext3 app). And it doesn't seem Ext4 was built with IE7 in mind. So what then, do we need two different frameworks?
12 Jul 2011 12:57 PM #38
8 Aug 2011 11:59 AM #39
Until there's a simple, well documented way of moving to 4, I see no reason to put myself through the effort. What conceptually bothers me is that the product is taking the tact of a lot of annoying packages of saying we know more about what you're doing than you do. Why, for instance, is it screwing with my body tag. I don't want you to be messing with parts of my application that don't use EXTjs.
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)