Did we read the same article? I didn't see this as an attack on jQuery at all. Furthermore, he didn't even blame any tools! He blamed the platform because as usual, the web platform itself is indeed the problem.
"...developers coming from the backend who don't take web development seriously."
That's because client side web development is a joke. It's a really bad one too compared to a nice native kit. The people who come up with all the silly ways of turning a fracking Hyper-TEXT system into an applications platform should be shot. I'm kidding about shooting anyone, but honestly - it's horrible how many hoops you have to jump through. HTML is the worst thing that's ever happened to software development. The Internet is TCP/IP, it's not HTML and personally, I want for something better every day and I know you do to because all you web developers are always, always, always complaining about something.
"self-righteousness attack on a very important tool is very misleading and ungrateful"
Once again, self-righteous? Sorry, I just don't see it. He wasn't even blaming the jQuery guys for one single thing. This kind of problem could happen with any large Javascript library that runs in the browser.
The proposed solution is not insane if you don't want to make your server framework do more work. There's absolutely nothing wrong with making code run in the browser so that you don't have to do something on the server. You need to get off your high horse buddy.
I hate the whole web paradigm but it's what's in use and it's definitely improving. And in particular, jQuery makes it less painful so that's what many of us use (or similar JS frameworks). The same problem happens at the low end with the x86 instruction set. Yet we live with it.
None of that makes it OK to write a bashful title that should've read "Stop paying your ASP MVC JS tax" or something. It all comes down on how they need to have inlined JS requiring $(document).ready(). That's the problem and not jQuery.
'None of that makes it OK to write a bashful title that should've read "Stop paying your ASP MVC JS tax" or something.
'
"Bashful" means "shy," not "full of bash," as you seem to think. Actually, I wonder if you speak English natively as you seem to be the only person who interpreted the article the way you did.
"...developers coming from the backend who don't take web development seriously."
That's because client side web development is a joke. It's a really bad one too compared to a nice native kit. The people who come up with all the silly ways of turning a fracking Hyper-TEXT system into an applications platform should be shot. I'm kidding about shooting anyone, but honestly - it's horrible how many hoops you have to jump through. HTML is the worst thing that's ever happened to software development. The Internet is TCP/IP, it's not HTML and personally, I want for something better every day and I know you do to because all you web developers are always, always, always complaining about something.
"self-righteousness attack on a very important tool is very misleading and ungrateful"
Once again, self-righteous? Sorry, I just don't see it. He wasn't even blaming the jQuery guys for one single thing. This kind of problem could happen with any large Javascript library that runs in the browser.
The proposed solution is not insane if you don't want to make your server framework do more work. There's absolutely nothing wrong with making code run in the browser so that you don't have to do something on the server. You need to get off your high horse buddy.