MooTools versus Script.aculo.us

Page 4 - More MooTools

Skip to navigation

There is no clear winner between the two, unless you are after something in specific that only one of them does. In addition to what I've already compared there are many more functions in the MooTools framework I've not mentioned - such as the many "helper" functions for extending classes, serializing forms, type conversions, shorthand notations, AJAX/JSON calls, etc.

There is of course more to MooTools than that. Looking closer we find it has it's own colour object that can be used for specifying colours and converting it between different notations such as RGB to HSL.

The scroller plugin makes it easy to scroll divs when you reach a certain boundary on an edge, and the SmoothScroll plugin allows the page to smoothly scroll to anchors rather than jumping to them - all things that help polish the interface.

There is also a Slider control - similar to the one in Script.aculo.us. It adds two elements to the page, the bar and the button that is moved along the bar. As you move it, it returns a value. Simple.

Finally, there is also plugins for nice looking tooltips, and for an "accordian" effect - where a menu slides to show different menu options depending on what heading is clicked.

your comments - Post a comment

Anonymous

Thank you for the helpful review. Some thoughts: I'm quite sure that mootools at this time can do many if not all of the effects listed in the effects comparison. It may be, however, that mootools does not include specific functions for effects that can be produced using more basic functions. The purpose of mootools is to be as compact and abstract as possible -- to avoid redundancy in function definitions, etc. That said, I often have a very hard time getting mootools to work -- it has a very steep learning curve and assumes a deep understanding of class-based object oriented programming. For beginning and intermediate scripters, then, scriptaculous is probably a better choice.

Anonymous commented 10 years ago
Anonymous

I'll second the previous comment.
What do you need for scriptaculous's "Pulsate" effect? You need to increase the brightness of the object, decrease it, increase it... you know, I'll do that as a class (with a "from" and a "number" attribute! :)) and post back here.

Annis

Anonymous commented 10 years ago
David G. Paul

Hi,

Sorry, at the time of writing the effects were done based on what they did "straight out of the box".

Scriptaculous can do the pulsate effect just by doing, Effect.Pulsate('id-of-element') - whereas at the time of writing mooTools did not have anything built in to do that which meant finding some code on the 'net that someones written as an extension, or writing your own.

I do totally agree though that mooTools is designed to be more abstract, I was trying to aim this article more at users that have not used a framework before and may be relatively new to JavaScript and so tried to take the article from their perspective. You're absolutely right though, from a more advanced users point of view like the first poster, mooTools would probably be better as it is lighter weight and so isn't going to have so much of the "fluff" that prototype/scriptaculous has that is unlikely to be used.

I might at some point in the future write an article on using and extending mooTools, and how to use it to get some of the functions that Scriptaculous has. I'm also planning on writing a jQuery one very soon.

David G. Paul commented 10 years ago
Mike Landis

How about Dojo, Rico, and OpenAjax vs. Scriptaculous and MooTools?

Mike Landis commented 9 years ago
blog comments powered by Disqus