Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

If not React, then what?

infrequently.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 756 posts

Re: If not React, then what?

#21

Post by rafaelmn »

Spivak wrote: post #16
refulgentis wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Heartily concur. It's a classic of an essay written by one of those tortured souls who cannot understand why everyone so blithely moves past the incisive, obvious, truths they share. With a topping of how this is all just solved by "giving a toss about the user", followed by a cloying apology for being vulgar I'm not in web and am amenable to a good web dev hot take but this simply isn't worth the time, it's an array…

I mean the graph in the article of Amazon vs Target vs Wayfair is pretty damning. And honestly you don't even need the graph, just go to their sites. Target is dog slow while Amazon loads instantly.

> And honestly you don't even need the graph, just go to their sites. Target is dog slow while Amazon loads instantly.

I was not able to notice any difference between them

Re: If not React, then what?

#22

Post by xcrunner529 »

Spivak wrote: post #16
refulgentis wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Heartily concur. It's a classic of an essay written by one of those tortured souls who cannot understand why everyone so blithely moves past the incisive, obvious, truths they share. With a topping of how this is all just solved by "giving a toss about the user", followed by a cloying apology for being vulgar I'm not in web and am amenable to a good web dev hot take but this simply isn't worth the time, it's an array…

I mean the graph in the article of Amazon vs Target vs Wayfair is pretty damning. And honestly you don't even need the graph, just go to their sites. Target is dog slow while Amazon loads instantly.

Yep! Made me remember my bad target experiences as well. Love how that’s all ignored by some.

Re: If not React, then what?

#23

Post by Gualdrapo »

QuiDortDine wrote: post #7

WOW this is a long article! Still waiting for the substance though... The only point I can agree with is that React is stupidly hard to learn. It feels like a tool made for aliens, though once you master it, it can be pretty efficient. Sorry to be the bearer of bad news, but the JS-free web isn't coming back. And if you're using modern JS, you might as well use React (or a similar tool). The user won't be able to tel…

> Sorry to be the bearer of bad news, but the JS-free web isn't coming back.

It has never went anywhere? All it takes is a user brave enough to disable it or to use a web browser that doesn't use it or has issues with it. But for some reason many web devs actively ignore that.

Re: If not React, then what?

#24

Post by xcrunner529 »

quantadev wrote: post #20

The people who don't think React (or Vue) is important are the same ones who have never worked on a large project with lots of screen updates and state changes that absolutely cannot be avoided. React is still #1 in popularity, and the most crucial tool for almost any web developer (aside from using TypeScript, instead of plain JS which is also critical for large projects) React is reported to be used by 39.5% of dev…

Ha and jquery was pretty high too. How is that an argument?

Re: If not React, then what?

#25

Post by msoad »

4ntiq wrote: post #2

I read through this to hopefully save all of you the clickbait and mid-way through nonsensical philosophical diatribe. It's a bit ranty and devoid of technically-caloric content. The author is advocating for use of plain HTML/SSR patterns and avoiding SPAs and complicated frameworks/libraries ala Angular/React/etc. It's an old thought that lines up with the "you don't need JS" crowd. Oh, and the author would like to…

React works because I can hire engineers that can be productive quickly. A lot of tech conversations leave the talent pool aside as if it's easy to find good engineers in all of the options you might have.

The ecosystem is another aspect. You have so many great options for off the shelf components and libraries with React that you might not have with other frameworks.

Before anyone mentions Custom Elements and Web Components, I must say I tried it. Gave it a lot of effort to be a solution but it is not!

Re: If not React, then what?

#26

Post by simonw »

msoad wrote: post #25
4ntiq wrote: post #2

I read through this to hopefully save all of you the clickbait and mid-way through nonsensical philosophical diatribe. It's a bit ranty and devoid of technically-caloric content. The author is advocating for use of plain HTML/SSR patterns and avoiding SPAs and complicated frameworks/libraries ala Angular/React/etc. It's an old thought that lines up with the "you don't need JS" crowd. Oh, and the author would like to…

React works because I can hire engineers that can be productive quickly. A lot of tech conversations leave the talent pool aside as if it's easy to find good engineers in all of the options you might have. The ecosystem is another aspect. You have so many great options for off the shelf components and libraries with React that you might not have with other frameworks. Before anyone mentions Custom Elements and Web Co…

"React works because I can hire engineers that can be productive quickly. A lot of tech conversations leave the talent pool aside as if it's easy to find good engineers in all of the options you might have."

That's covered in this section: https://infrequently.org/2024/11/if-not-react-then-what/#%22...

"The ecosystem is another aspect. You have so many great options for off the shelf components and libraries with React that you might not have with other frameworks."

That's covered here: https://infrequently.org/2024/11/if-not-react-then-what/#%22...

Re: If not React, then what?

#28

Post by fiddlerwoaroof »

ganksalot wrote: post #6
4ntiq wrote: post #2

I read through this to hopefully save all of you the clickbait and mid-way through nonsensical philosophical diatribe. It's a bit ranty and devoid of technically-caloric content. The author is advocating for use of plain HTML/SSR patterns and avoiding SPAs and complicated frameworks/libraries ala Angular/React/etc. It's an old thought that lines up with the "you don't need JS" crowd. Oh, and the author would like to…

o7 thanks, people like this who do not work in contexts with problems that React solves yet insist React is not solving problems are profoundly boring.

I spent a lot of time working on react applications of one kind or another and I think most businesses don’t have “problems that React solves” for their frontends. Somewhere that’s actually an application might, but most line of business applications would be better as something like Rails views rather than React

Re: If not React, then what?

#29

Post by [deleted] »

4ntiq wrote: post #2

I read through this to hopefully save all of you the clickbait and mid-way through nonsensical philosophical diatribe. It's a bit ranty and devoid of technically-caloric content. The author is advocating for use of plain HTML/SSR patterns and avoiding SPAs and complicated frameworks/libraries ala Angular/React/etc. It's an old thought that lines up with the "you don't need JS" crowd. Oh, and the author would like to…

[deleted]

Re: If not React, then what?

#30

Post by simonw »

rafaelmn wrote: post #21
Spivak wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I mean the graph in the article of Amazon vs Target vs Wayfair is pretty damning. And honestly you don't even need the graph, just go to their sites. Target is dog slow while Amazon loads instantly.

> And honestly you don't even need the graph, just go to their sites. Target is dog slow while Amazon loads instantly. I was not able to notice any difference between them

Were you using a ~$2000 laptop on a broadband connection?
Post reply on HN