Comparison Of BackboneJS And AngularJS

AngularJS vs. Backbone.js

Backbone’s Introduction

Backbone.js is a light JavaScript framework made in 2010 by Jeremy Ashkenas. Its only dependency is Underscore.js which greatly decreases the time period required to load and use the Backbone.js framework. Backbone.js was designed as an alternative to more heavy frameworks like ExtJS, and has also been adopted by many organizations that look for more light architecture implementations.

The MVP Architecture

Backbone.js has been built with a Model-View-Presenter (MVP) architecture. It uses an Actor model to represent the driving behavior of the framework. This is in contrasts with AngularJS which uses a Model-View-Controller (MVC) architecture and 2-way data binding to achieve the same. The MVP architecture is the parent architecture from which MVC has been derived, so, while data update drivers are different  between these frameworks, the core patterns are very similar with surprisingly very few differences between the two frameworks.

Templating in Backbon.js and Angular.js

Template processing is one great way to reduce an amount of code you would need to write to get a single-page application up and running. AngularJS does offers templating through dynamic HTML attributes that added to the HTML document, making representations concise and simple to grasp at a functional level. Backbone.js, on the other hand, has Underscore templates, which give it a format some what quite similar to Ember. But the templates offered by Underscore are not as full featured as those offered by Angular, which means that you will often need to write custom JavaScript to make sure that your templates work exactly as your are expecting.


Simply put, Backbone.js is much, abundant quicker than AngularJS – notably as information sets scale. each frameworks ar comparable in performance for smaller pages, however because the page grows the two-way information binding offered by AngularJS starts to own bigger damaging performance effects. As Backbone.js doesn’t do any information binding, you regularly got to write that binding yourself. whereas this ends up in a bigger quantity of code, it’s the good thing about permitting you to target rising performance while not having to hack the underlying framework. That being same, in several cases the compact illustration that AngularJS offers your information is usually thought-about to be definitely worth the shrunken performance.

Application Architecture

Both AngularJS and Backbone.js use architectures derived from the larger class of MV* patterns – Angular uses MVC, whereas Backbone uses player. Functionally these architectures ar extremely similar. the many variations between the 2 return from the implementation (or lack thereof) of information binding. Angular uses two-way knowledge binding to drive application activity, chase changes to the displayed knowledge and mechanically triggering updates within the underlying models. this could build development of interactive data-driven applications fairly easy and straightforward to understand at a module level. Backbone.js, on the opposite hand, provides no knowledge binding some. With Backbone, the developer must either write their own knowledge binding mechanism, or use a plug-in and scale the scale of Backbone consequently. One different vital distinction between the 2 architectures is in however the DOM is handled. AngularJS, through its specialize in valid hypertext markup language and dynamic parts that mirror the underlying knowledge, rebuilds the DOM consistent with the desired rules whenever the info is updated. Backbone.js, on the opposite hand, depends upon direct DOM manipulation to represent changes in knowledge and application design. whereas this could lead to faster rendering of changes to giant knowledge sets, it severely impacts the flexibility to effectively make sure the correctness of your code exploitation unit testing – a precept that’s at the core of Angular’s approach to DOM manipulation.


Backbone.js could be a light-weight net framework targeted on providing a superior net application that’s each straightforward to develop and dependable operative. whereas AngularJS has these goals likewise, it adds variety of options like two-way information binding and dependency injection that aren’t on the market in Backbone.js, providing a a lot of complete net development framework during a package with negligible dependencies. whereas Backbone.js includes a higher performance profile than AngularJS, this could be offset by Backbone-based net apps requiring a bigger – and fewer stable – code base. Ultimately, Backbone.js is a superb selection for easy applications that don’t got to rely on significant constitutional information interactivity, however by selecting such a light-weight framework you’ll be abandoning lots of the options that a framework like AngularJS provides, scaling your development time consequently.

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Scroll to Top