Why is jQuery so widely adopted versus other Javascript frameworks? [closed]

Answer 1

What I DON'T need in JavaScript is definetely OOP and some ugly object emulation.

Last time I checked MooTools (maybe 1,5 years ago :-), it had browser incompatibilities with manipulating multiple select.

So jQuery is completely looks OK to me.

Answer 2

Larger User Community and more wide-spread adoption makes a big difference when comparing tools/libraries that offer similar functionality and concepts. Larger community means more support, more examples, more good ideas, and more reusable code snippets, which is especially important when you're working on a rare scenario -- more likely someone else has encountered it before.

Secondly, in benchmarks I've seen, jQuery is faster than MooTools.

I also really like their emphasis on keeping a small core and adding functionality through plugins. Prevents the core library from getting really big and unwieldy.

I've never used MooTools personally but I have no doubt that its a fantastic library that offers some acceptable equivalent to most any jQuery feature or concept, but point #1 takes the cake for me.

Answer 3

Personally, jQuery does exactly what I need.

I try to do most of my stuff in my server-side code, which is well structured: it has proper OOP, layers, and an MVC architecture. When I need to do something with Javascript, I have found (so far) that jQuery has what I need. Frankly, that falls into three categories:

• Simple DOM manipulation, usually showing/hiding stuff without hitting the server.
• Ajax calls, nuff said.
• UI perks, including modal popups, animations, fading transitions from/to hidden/shown. I am a hardcore backend coding guy, and I suck at UI stuff. I really like that jQuery lets me programmatically make stuff that looks appealing.

On top of that, the jQuery plugin library is huge, and I've found quite a few libraries that simplify my client-side work. Good stuff.

MooTools introduces OO thinking, which is nice, but not what I need. I want to keep my structuredness all on the backend, and not have to introduce that thinking to my client-side code. To me, client-side code is a very small piece of the emphasis and thinking about it from a Class-point-of-view is way overkill, and way more work. I feel like I'd be building two applications instead of one if I were to use what I'd think would be best practices for MooToools.

I think that sums up why its so popular, especially around here. By and large, we're backend code-y type people, and jQuery lets us make an appealing UI programmatically, and lets us focus on our backend core.

Answer 4

Not only is jQuery a nice library, but its creator, John Resig, also has some street cred as the author of Pro Javascript Techniques.

We have 2-3 copies of this book around our office.

jQuery is small (intentionally so) but can have functionality added to it through plugins.

Answer 5

That's an odd question... I get the impression that...

1. you are very familiar with mootools and take full advantage of its OOP model, making your code easier to manage and support already.
2. you realise that jQuery's purpose is somewhat different and tweaked towards DOM manipulation and AJAX and that mootools does do everything jQuery does AND then some.
3. sounds as if you do not need to be using much in the way of 3-rd party plugins which makes the points of jQuery's popularity and support a bit less important.

Bottom line, is it the hype? jQuery is turning into one of these magical marketing buzzwords like 'AJAX', .NET and Web 2.0 — which is great for them but why do you need to justify staying with the framework that works so well for you? There's also the business considerations which I imagine will cover things like:

• framework longevity, or is mootools likely to go away in the face of the ever growing jQuery — very doubtful, seeing as they just released 1.3 beta 1 and have 2.0 is in the pipelines for release by the end of the year.
• cost of staff and their training (I imagine finding mootools programmers will be more difficult than these that slap jquery on their C.V / resume).
• time (and cost) taken to maintain and extend your systems under each framework given your resources.

Both frameworks are great but I believe your interests are best served in staying with mootools.

Answer 6

I choose to use jQuery as our default UI library precisely because it does not extend or otherwise monkeypatch native objects, unlike prototype.js or mootools. Kick in the documentation angle and there really is no question as to which framework to use.