A client recently reached out and asked if we’d be interested in building a Meteor site for them. (The fact that they asked for the technology by name was interesting.)
At the start of our meeting, he asked what we liked about Meteor. My answer is:
- it speeds our development immensely (write once, client and server-side code all in JS, lots of performance issues handled for us like data-on-the-wire, sending only changes, etc.),
- security (methods on server),
- it’s a full-stack ecosystem (atmosphere, db included, etc.)…
- with a single, funded, and impressive group behind it. (Part of our decision to bet heavily on Meteor back at 0.5 was seeing @debergalis at HTML5 I think, and seeing that there was a grown-up at the wheel. I have been burned before and since with startup vaporware BS.)
Note that reactivity isn’t even in our top four, because I don’t feel it’s a key differentiator for Meteor. Other solutions have it, and of course you could roll your own.
I find it interesting that Meteor is being pigeonholed as “It has this cool reactivity built in”, and that feels like a non-winnable battle. So do other things, and that’s not the key Meteor play.
JMHO, YMMV, ETC.