Client-side Web

CNET: The great JavaScript debate: Improve it or kill it?

All in all I enjoyed the article. There's no doubt that the current JavaScript needs to evolve or be replaced. I can't really choose which option now, but maybe more towards a replacement?

I use more jQuery than pure JavaScript nowadays. I love its way of DOM object accessing. And I consider it's more of a new language than an extension. So, I don't care learning a new language for a JavaScript replacement or two. Because most of the JavaScript usage is DOM manipulation, the way jQuery is structured makes a lot of sense. And I even wish there would be a native jQuery engine instead of background JavaScript translation.

Speaking of the article, I have a bit of opinion on the last two paragraph on the third page, though. -- It is not about the "platforms [...] closed, vertically integrated, and proprietary" vs. "the open, standards-based Web." As the author suggested, apps in the former is "purpose-built". Depending on the purpose of each project, the client-side technology should be picked. Write-once-and-run-anywhere is too much to wish for at this moment, considering the current clients vary in their processing power and power consumption. Developers should be flexible and not to be afraid of writing in multiple platforms. Besides, it would be a key for your job security.