Agree with all your points, think it's a bit subjective, but yeah... I loved how if I wanted to install my meteor project on a new machine it was just a couple of commands and everything including the database was ready to go. Contrast to these days, where you have 15 microservices, a dozen docker containers, ten million npm packages... :)
Basically it was a huge trade off: a 100% batteries included product that worked very well together because it was all made by the same people, Vs. the npm "bring your own whatever and wire it all up" approach. There are big pros and cons to both.
I think the comparisons to Rails are interesting, but actually not entirely fair either. Rails will always be primarily a back-end framework, no matter how much stuff is bolted on to its highly opinionated (of course) front-end toolchain.
Meteor was full-stack from the ground-up. In fact, Meteor was just "stack".
Comments
Agree with all your points, think it's a bit subjective, but yeah... I loved how if I wanted to install my meteor project on a new machine it was just a couple of commands and everything including the database was ready to go. Contrast to these days, where you have 15 microservices, a dozen docker containers, ten million npm packages... :)
Basically it was a huge trade off: a 100% batteries included product that worked very well together because it was all made by the same people, Vs. the npm "bring your own whatever and wire it all up" approach. There are big pros and cons to both.
I think the comparisons to Rails are interesting, but actually not entirely fair either. Rails will always be primarily a back-end framework, no matter how much stuff is bolted on to its highly opinionated (of course) front-end toolchain.
Meteor was full-stack from the ground-up. In fact, Meteor was just "stack".