🆚 Facebook SDK vs. Quill
- 📈 Facebook SDK is much more popular than Quill.
- 🌍 Facebook SDK is more popular in all countries.
Type
About
Facebook SDK is a library that provides client-side tools for Social Plugins, Login, and Graph API calls.
It enables loading Social Plugins such as Like,
Share, or
Comments buttons, initiating
Facebook Login with configurable permissions, and opening dialogs for sharing, fetching and updating data via Graph API endpoints.
Quill is an open-source JavaScript WYSIWYG text editor designed to provide consistent content editing across browsers using a structured document model.
It is built around a JSON-based delta format for representing content and changes, supports core text formatting and embeds, offers a modular API with themes and modules, and requires third-party plugins or converters to export content as
HTML.
Headquarters
Pricing
Categories
Popularity
Determined by the number of sites using each technology.
Market share
Popularity by country
Determined by the number of sites detected from each country.
Awards
- 🥈 Second most popular in Poland in the JavaScript Libraries category.
- 🥈 Second most popular in Vietnam in the JavaScript Libraries category.
- 🥈 Second most popular in Ukraine in the JavaScript Libraries category.
- 🥈 Second most popular in the Czech Republic in the JavaScript Libraries category.
- 🥈 Second most popular in Hungary in the JavaScript Libraries category.
- ⬆️ 124th most popular in Taiwan in the JavaScript Libraries category.
- ⬆️ 140th most popular in Korea in the JavaScript Libraries category.
- ⬆️ 149th most popular in China in the JavaScript Libraries category.
- ⬆️ 168th most popular in Russia in the JavaScript Libraries category.
- ⬆️ 175th most popular in Brazil in the JavaScript Libraries category.
Popularity by domain category
Determined by the number of sites in each category.
Top sites
Top-ranked sites that use these technologies.
Compare alternatives
Technologies with similar characteristics.
See also
🗃️ About This Data
- We evaluate the popularity of technologies based on the number of websites where we detect their usage.
- Technologies without a detectable web footprint, and those we do not track, are not reflected in the calculated market share.
- This report is based on the analysis of 3,375,483 websites.
- Statistics were last calculated on .
- For more details, see our methodology and disclaimer.


X for Websites
TinyMCE
Froala