Join GitHub today
GitHub is home to over 40 million developers working together to host and review code, manage projects, and build software together.
Sign upRequest: adding a note about Angular is not including AngularJS (1.x) #26
Comments
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
|
Since last year we decided the Angular/AngularJS split happened a long enough time ago that we could move on and just refer to "Angular". After all we don't make any distinction between Vue 1.0 and Vue 2.0 in the survey either, and the exact same arguments could apply to that. So I don't think it's unfair to treat Angular the same way we treat every other framework. |
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
|
@SachaG Vue.js didn't change its name between 1.0 and 2.0. It's natural because it is a common major version up. But the difference between AngularJS and Angular is not a common case. That Vue's example corresponds to Angular 7.0 and 8.0. My hope was just adding one line note, not changing the survey. |
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
|
I think that clarifying that StateOfJS is asking about only "Angular" brings nothing negative side. Reducing ambiguity may make the survey more reliable and worthfully. |
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
|
The issue is that if we add a note next year it will skew the data since we didn't have that note this year or last, and that will make it harder to compare trends. On the other hand, we did add a note to the results in 2018 to explain how the question was phrased:
|
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
|
I can understand the concern about skewing but already it seems probably happened in the last year by dropping "AngularJS". |
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
|
What I'd like to improve is the ambiguity of the "Angular" question. |
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
|
Well, whatever skewing happened this year and last year, we want to keep the same skew going forward to make it possible to compare 2020, 2019, and 2018. If we "de-skewed" 2020 by doing what you suggest it would then make it impossible to compare 2020 with 2019 and 2018 because the question was not phrased the same way. In other words we'd rather have ambiguity but remain consistent than change things for the sake of clarity and break continuity with past years. |
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
May I suggest to split the Angular section into two, one for the AngularJS and another for Angular (v2 and up)?
I do not quite agree with this. Isn't the whole point of surveys, in general, is to collect results as objective as possible? If the data is not being truthful then what's the point of collecting them? The naming case of Angular/AngularJS is special, but if the same situation also happens to React and Vue.js then keeping the same survey format for the sake of consistency can be bad. More clarity is good for users and for developers, those who can take a look at the results and make decisions for their projects. Technology keeps changing, so the survey format should also be updated to reflect those changes. I do agree with your concerns about allowing people to see the trend but its importance may be overestimated, as the dataset collected each year may come from different groups. |
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
Ambiguity defeats the whole point of a survey. |
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
Hi. I know this is a confusing topic, but it's actually really problematic not to mention the Angular version in a survey. Most people who worked with AngularJS will associate their experience with the term "Angular". If I look at the projects of my clients, there are still a shockingly high number of AngularJS (1.x) projects out there and EoL of AngularJS is in 2021 (July 1, 2018 — June 30, 2021 AngularJS 1.7 LTS Period). I'm maybe the wrong person to tell, since I'm bias to Angular because of my fantastic experience with it, but I seriously doubt the quality of your data given the ambiguity. |
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
@SachaG I don't think that this response is valid. Nobody wants to split Angular 7 and 8. I'ts just a coincidence that AngularJS and Angular have similar names as they're totally different frameworks. Angular team naming decision while creating Angular 2+ now makes Your survey unreliable. If Angular team would go with different (Ralugna) name in the past You'd still connect them together ? On what basis ? |
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
|
Connect React, Preact and React native together, their names are almost identical. |
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
|
@dtomaszewski My friend I'm just going to speak straight to you about this one, they're biased against Angular so it doesn't really matter to them. So don't waste your time trying to reason with them. Also don't stress about statistics they can often be misleading, if extra effort isn't made to remove inconsistencies like this "Lies, damned lies, and statistics" - Mark Twain My advice, just continue enjoying Angular and ignore the survey, I think a better one is stack overflow anyways. |
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
"We'd rather be consistently inaccurate than have clear, factual data going forward" lol what? I can appreciate that the StateOfJS is just a side project for a few people, but if you market and publish it as some objective source of truth for the JS community, it's kind of disingenuous. I realize differentiating Angular and AngularJS could add quite a bit of extra work on the implementation side, but if that's the roadblock here let's just be upfront about it. |
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
|
@SachaG If you sum up weekly NPM downloads of Preact, Svelte, and Ember you still get a lower number than AngularJS weekly downloads. And yet Preact, Svelte or Ember get to be separate items in the questionnaire and AngularJS does not. Moreover, I think it's fair to say that Angular and AngularJS have less in common than React and Preact, and yet the later get to be separate items in the questionnaire. In my opinion, it's really confusing and inconsistent. There are no reasons to treat Angular and AngularJS as a single framework (they're not, they're two completely different libraries) |
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
|
@SachaG I hope you realize that if you can't provide accurate and meaningful results in this category than the community will produce something that replaces this. I'm also extremely disappointed in the slant of this data set, I don't mind learning React or Vue or any of the other frameworks, but you absolutely cannot loop AngularJS (1.x versions) with Angular (2.x and above version), they simply aren't the same thing. And for those that used AngularJS and then left to another library, you are now misrepresenting Angular to them, making them think that it's more of the same old same old instead of a complete departure from how Angular used to do things. This is also damaging to Angular's reputation as well as to any entity using it, this went from an accurate data set to "Use React instead of Angular because it's more popular" in the eyes of companies, when in fact the data set is inaccurate and incomplete. Continuing to loop the two together is irresponsible and unprofessional given this is supposed to give an accurate state of JS, regardless of how difficult it might be to change the data set in order to provide accurate results. |
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
|
What's the value of the survey then? |
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
I don't dispute that, but why wouldn't we be able to drop AngularJS from our survey? After all we don't have jQuery, Backbone, or Knockout either. |
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
|
@SachaG Unfortunately Angular's naming convention is still confusing to some people, you could at least add some kind of disclaimer next to Angular, that name Angular applies only to "new" Angular and AngularJS isn't part of the survey anymore |
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
That's a valid solution. It would still mess with the continuity from one year to another but I'll consider it. |
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
|
https://medium.com/@sachagreif/three-controversial-charts-from-the-state-of-js-2018-ec9dda45749
The same mistake is made. |
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
You're right, we didn't improve this aspect compared to 2018. There was a lot to work on on a tight deadline and I never got to thinking about this issue specifically, so I apologize for that. I also think a lot of the complaining about this particular issue over the years have made me overly dismissive of some of the valid points made here, and re-reading that 2018 post I think I probably had a more balanced opinion there. So anyway my conclusion is that in 2020 we will have a note next to Angular specifying that it does not refer to AngularJS. Hopefully that will be enough to clear up the confusion. And if I somehow forget again feel free to link to this comment and publicly shame me. |
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
@SachaG |
StateOfJS seems not to distinguish Angular and AngualrJS in the survey and there are no notes about that.

It’s unfair because 1) the name convention about Angular/AngularJS is not well-known yet. 2) Many developers have experience in years ago with AngularJS-only 3) So, it is natural that "Used it > would avoid" raises.
4) Even if they have experiences with Angular, it is not clear which Angular the survey asks about.
I agree that today it doesn't have to survey about AngularJS because it is not a fresh technology. But I think the one line note about distinguishing is still important for clarifying the target of the survey.
Thanks.