Comments on: Comparison Between Prototype and jQuery Javascript Library http://www.webappers.com/2009/01/17/comparison-between-prototype-and-jquery-javascript-library/ - Hunting the Best Open Source Resources for Web Developers Sat, 20 Mar 2010 06:17:16 -0700 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.6 hourly 1 By: hanumhttp://www.webappers.com/2009/01/17/comparison-between-prototype-and-jquery-javascript-library/comment-page-1/#comment-29740 hanum Tue, 27 Oct 2009 11:40:08 +0000 http://www.webappers.com/?p=1471#comment-29740 nice info sharing. Thank's a lot for informatif posting ^_^ nice info sharing. Thank’s a lot for informatif posting ^_^

]]> By: qqrqhttp://www.webappers.com/2009/01/17/comparison-between-prototype-and-jquery-javascript-library/comment-page-1/#comment-20475 qqrq Tue, 20 Jan 2009 07:52:29 +0000 http://www.webappers.com/?p=1471#comment-20475 Well in my opinion, if you want to build big widget-based, feature-full, AJAX-look-and-feel app, you should look at ExtJS. For other uses jQuery is most painless for me - I don't like JavaScript in general. Well in my opinion, if you want to build big widget-based, feature-full, AJAX-look-and-feel app, you should look at ExtJS. For other uses jQuery is most painless for me – I don’t like JavaScript in general.

]]> By: Daniel Buchnerhttp://www.webappers.com/2009/01/17/comparison-between-prototype-and-jquery-javascript-library/comment-page-1/#comment-20467 Daniel Buchner Tue, 20 Jan 2009 01:27:16 +0000 http://www.webappers.com/?p=1471#comment-20467 I think that proto is often too bloated. Mootools has all the things you can ever need in designing an awesome, dynamic site while being hands down the best at effects and pa nosh as any framework out there. I used Proto, a little jQuery (on our our programmers uses it for our FF addons) and I have to say Moo brings a classical structure to JS like no one can! I think that proto is often too bloated. Mootools has all the things you can ever need in designing an awesome, dynamic site while being hands down the best at effects and pa nosh as any framework out there. I used Proto, a little jQuery (on our our programmers uses it for our FF addons) and I have to say Moo brings a classical structure to JS like no one can!

]]> By: Fransjohttp://www.webappers.com/2009/01/17/comparison-between-prototype-and-jquery-javascript-library/comment-page-1/#comment-20454 Fransjo Mon, 19 Jan 2009 11:17:49 +0000 http://www.webappers.com/?p=1471#comment-20454 Well,I use Prototype .. tried jquery but stopped using it. I want a framework for just functionality (prototype) and a framework to do the fancy gimmicks. Although jqeury has them both, I want those worlds sepparated (this way I can switch between gui frameworks very fast). At this moment I'm using YUI with Prototype and it's a killing combination ;-) Well,

I use Prototype .. tried jquery but stopped using it. I want a framework for just functionality (prototype) and a framework to do the fancy gimmicks. Although jqeury has them both, I want those worlds sepparated (this way I can switch between gui frameworks very fast). At this moment I’m using YUI with Prototype and it’s a killing combination ;-)

]]> By: Evan Byrnehttp://www.webappers.com/2009/01/17/comparison-between-prototype-and-jquery-javascript-library/comment-page-1/#comment-20444 Evan Byrne Sat, 17 Jan 2009 22:08:43 +0000 http://www.webappers.com/?p=1471#comment-20444 I would have to strongly disagree with john's comment. I use jQuery all the time for very complex tasks. I actually switched over from mootools to jQuery abotu half a year ago because I could do more complex things with jQuery. I would have to strongly disagree with john’s comment. I use jQuery all the time for very complex tasks. I actually switched over from mootools to jQuery abotu half a year ago because I could do more complex things with jQuery.

]]> By: Dannhttp://www.webappers.com/2009/01/17/comparison-between-prototype-and-jquery-javascript-library/comment-page-1/#comment-20442 Dann Sat, 17 Jan 2009 18:37:38 +0000 http://www.webappers.com/?p=1471#comment-20442 With the jQuery fanboy hype going on Prototype doesn't get the credit it deserves. Good comparison. With the jQuery fanboy hype going on Prototype doesn’t get the credit it deserves. Good comparison.

]]> By: fanhttp://www.webappers.com/2009/01/17/comparison-between-prototype-and-jquery-javascript-library/comment-page-1/#comment-20439 fan Sat, 17 Jan 2009 16:47:37 +0000 http://www.webappers.com/?p=1471#comment-20439 I used to use proto' then jquery. I've now moved onto mootools and will never look back! I used to use proto’ then jquery. I’ve now moved onto mootools and will never look back!

]]> By: Seagshttp://www.webappers.com/2009/01/17/comparison-between-prototype-and-jquery-javascript-library/comment-page-1/#comment-20433 Seags Sat, 17 Jan 2009 14:01:02 +0000 http://www.webappers.com/?p=1471#comment-20433 What version of jQuery is this based on? What version of jQuery is this based on?

]]> By: johnhttp://www.webappers.com/2009/01/17/comparison-between-prototype-and-jquery-javascript-library/comment-page-1/#comment-20429 john Sat, 17 Jan 2009 12:30:03 +0000 http://www.webappers.com/?p=1471#comment-20429 What i would like to see is a comparison of prototype to mootools. jQuerie seems to mee as a quick tool to do some 'effects'. while mootools on the otherhand offers a way to build a aplication. What i would like to see is a comparison of prototype to mootools. jQuerie seems to mee as a quick tool to do some ‘effects’. while mootools on the otherhand offers a way to build a aplication.

]]> By: Colin Greighttp://www.webappers.com/2009/01/17/comparison-between-prototype-and-jquery-javascript-library/comment-page-1/#comment-20424 Colin Greig Sat, 17 Jan 2009 07:30:44 +0000 http://www.webappers.com/?p=1471#comment-20424 Great to see a comparison post about these frameworks. Thank you! Great to see a comparison post about these frameworks. Thank you!

]]>