I use jQuery because I picked it up first and have never had a problem I could not solve with it. Can't say anything bad about EXT because I have never really used it.
I use jQuery more just because community is bigger. As of my working experience with extJS, it looks more mature, stable and better documented then jQuery. Other words, it always work the way it is documented.
I agree with Gareth. Personally, I'm not a huge fan of UI frameworks in general. I prefer to build my own UI's, and JQuery in my opinion makes it easiest to do so. If you don't want to create your own UI widgets then EXT certainly offers the nicest widgets out of the box.
When U use Railo you get all the AJAX-tags implemented in jQuery - it's an open source CFML-engine, so ExtJS wasn't a suitable candidate in this situation. From what I hear from the Railo-boys, the CF AJAX-tags perform as well or even better than the ExtJS components in CF9. They will all be available as of the next stable Railo release (3.2) due sometime this Fall.
I agree with gareth. But even if the UI is your main concern, jQuery is much more easier to extend and has a much smaller foot print. Also, jQuery is plugin based; if you don't like that grid there is probably another one or write your own. extJS requires a lot of resources to manipulate and extend. jQuery is free but I believe that you can use extJS on a CF server without additional purchase since it is already licensed as part of CF (not 100% sure).
I would prefer jQuery. I have only used it for a couple of personal 'toy' projects, but it seems much more intuitive to me and fun to work with. I've had to use EXTjs (versions 2.0 through 2.2) at work for a couple of big projects, and it's been miserable the whole time. It has been incredibly unintuitive to work with the layout--just try doing anything that involves updating the UI based on an AJAX server response, or anything with a combo box--and it is missing a few key things out of the box (multiselect lists? Haven't those been around since the 90's? Granted it is available as a plugin, but that means to use it you have to figure out how to use plugins.)
Put simply jQuery is like ColdFusion for JavaScript - it really makes developing front-end enjoyable and fun. I never use the integrated CF ajax/UI components based on Ext - the code is very bloated and not nice to customize. I've even had apps where I would have considered Flex in the past and gone with jQuery instead.
I have used both, but prefer jQuery. Was introduced to ExtJS because it was baked into ColdFusion. ExtJS has much more robust layout/UI widgets. But, when it comes to DOM manipulation, jQuery is king.
I was introduced to ExtJS because of the bundling with CF, but that did not overly impress me -- the UI functionality was cool, but the size of the scripts was not. Maybe ExtJS by itself is more manageable, but I didn't look further after that first impression. I prefer JQuery -- very lightweight, free, hosted on Google's CDN, more programming than widgets, but there are plenty of UI options if that is what you are after.
I have to say that for those of you who keep saying that jQuery has a smaller footprint is total BullShit.
ExtJS Core is as small as jQuery and does the same things and is also free.
The downside is when you start to use the UI stuff, jQuery is limited in this area but that doesn't mean that you can't write your own stuff.
But to compare something that only has a few UI elements to something that is feature rich is a bit like comparing an apple and an orange.
I have used both jQuery and ExtJS and ExtJS is far easier to work with when creating you own components and extending others, to modify the behaviour of the component to do something that it wasn't originally designed for.
But when it comes down to cost, it is going to boil down to what is going to be more cost effective. Paying the license fee for ExtJS, or finding that the features that are not in jQuery and time needed to write them.
But as a developer I always love a challenge as well.
ExtJS is a complete solution for generating a fluidly layed out UI, containing data-bound widgets like trees grid, dataviews etc.
jQuery is a foundation which encapsulates the DOM and event handling and animations etc.
*Ext Core* however, is a foundation which encapsulates the DOM and event handling and animations, and class creation and custom event handling etc. It is free.
How about an alternative? We're using dhtmlx (dhtmlx.com) at work and it does a good job in building complex UIs. Like ExtJs, it's not free, but UI widgets are mature and stable, and support is timely in most cases.
I use jQuery because I picked it up first and have never had a problem I could not solve with it. Can't say anything bad about EXT because I have never really used it.
ReplyDeleteWhat I have done with EXT I do quite like but there is so much buzz on jQuery and the work I have done with jQuery has been enjoyable.
ReplyDeletejQuery is easier, but ExtJS components are richer... I still prefer jQuery.
ReplyDeleteI use jQuery more just because community is bigger. As of my working experience with extJS, it looks more mature, stable and better documented then jQuery. Other words, it always work the way it is documented.
ReplyDeleteI don't think you can really say it's jQuery vs extJS, as although there is some overlap, they are designed to do different jobs.
ReplyDeleteextJS is all about a rich javascript UI, where as jQuery is all about DOM manipulation.
extJS is more comparable to the jQuery UI framework
I agree with Gareth. Personally, I'm not a huge fan of UI frameworks in general. I prefer to build my own UI's, and JQuery in my opinion makes it easiest to do so. If you don't want to create your own UI widgets then EXT certainly offers the nicest widgets out of the box.
ReplyDeleteWhen U use Railo you get all the AJAX-tags implemented in jQuery - it's an open source CFML-engine, so ExtJS wasn't a suitable candidate in this situation. From what I hear from the Railo-boys, the CF AJAX-tags perform as well or even better than the ExtJS components in CF9. They will all be available as of the next stable Railo release (3.2) due sometime this Fall.
ReplyDeleteI agree with gareth. But even if the UI is your main concern, jQuery is much more easier to extend and has a much smaller foot print. Also, jQuery is plugin based; if you don't like that grid there is probably another one or write your own. extJS requires a lot of resources to manipulate and extend. jQuery is free but I believe that you can use extJS on a CF server without additional purchase since it is already licensed as part of CF (not 100% sure).
ReplyDeleteI would prefer jQuery. I have only used it for a couple of personal 'toy' projects, but it seems much more intuitive to me and fun to work with. I've had to use EXTjs (versions 2.0 through 2.2) at work for a couple of big projects, and it's been miserable the whole time. It has been incredibly unintuitive to work with the layout--just try doing anything that involves updating the UI based on an AJAX server response, or anything with a combo box--and it is missing a few key things out of the box (multiselect lists? Haven't those been around since the 90's? Granted it is available as a plugin, but that means to use it you have to figure out how to use plugins.)
ReplyDeletePut simply jQuery is like ColdFusion for JavaScript - it really makes developing front-end enjoyable and fun. I never use the integrated CF ajax/UI components based on Ext - the code is very bloated and not nice to customize. I've even had apps where I would have considered Flex in the past and gone with jQuery instead.
ReplyDeleteI have used both, but prefer jQuery. Was introduced to ExtJS because it was baked into ColdFusion. ExtJS has much more robust layout/UI widgets. But, when it comes to DOM manipulation, jQuery is king.
ReplyDeletejQuery generates lots of buzz and it evolves fast. With jQuery UI and recent jQuery Mobile initiative it's better choice over extJS IMO.
ReplyDeleteI was introduced to ExtJS because of the bundling with CF, but that did not overly impress me -- the UI functionality was cool, but the size of the scripts was not. Maybe ExtJS by itself is more manageable, but I didn't look further after that first impression. I prefer JQuery -- very lightweight, free, hosted on Google's CDN, more programming than widgets, but there are plenty of UI options if that is what you are after.
ReplyDeleteI have to say that for those of you who keep saying that jQuery has a smaller footprint is total BullShit.
ReplyDeleteExtJS Core is as small as jQuery and does the same things and is also free.
The downside is when you start to use the UI stuff, jQuery is limited in this area but that doesn't mean that you can't write your own stuff.
But to compare something that only has a few UI elements to something that is feature rich is a bit like comparing an apple and an orange.
I have used both jQuery and ExtJS and ExtJS is far easier to work with when creating you own components and extending others, to modify the behaviour of the component to do something that it wasn't originally designed for.
But when it comes down to cost, it is going to boil down to what is going to be more cost effective. Paying the license fee for ExtJS, or finding that the features that are not in jQuery and time needed to write them.
But as a developer I always love a challenge as well.
I am very much on the same wave length as the comment before me, it does all boil down to a number of things. For my out take on this pleae visit
ReplyDeletehttp://www.andyscott.id.au/2010/8/24/ColdFusion--do-I-use-extJS-or-jQuery
ExtJS/jQuery. Apples and oranges.
ReplyDeleteExtJS is a complete solution for generating a fluidly layed out UI, containing data-bound widgets like trees grid, dataviews etc.
jQuery is a foundation which encapsulates the DOM and event handling and animations etc.
*Ext Core* however, is a foundation which encapsulates the DOM and event handling and animations, and class creation and custom event handling etc. It is free.
How about an alternative? We're using dhtmlx (dhtmlx.com) at work and it does a good job in building complex UIs. Like ExtJs, it's not free, but UI widgets are mature and stable, and support is timely in most cases.
ReplyDelete