Live data from Hacker News

We fell out of love with Next.js and back in love with Ruby on Rails

hardcover.app

11–20 of 533 posts

Re: We fell out of love with Next.js and back in love with Ruby on Rails

#11

I’ve written a bit of rails and still don’t really get what the raving is about. It was perfectly fine, I didn’t find anything extra special about it. Having just hit severe scaling issues with a python service I’m inclined to only write my servers in Go or Rust anymore. It’s only a bit harder and you get something that can grow with you

There's really nothing to rave about because the ideas it introduced have all become standard. Rails is aggressively OK.

Re: We fell out of love with Next.js and back in love with Ruby on Rails

#12

I’ve written a bit of rails and still don’t really get what the raving is about. It was perfectly fine, I didn’t find anything extra special about it. Having just hit severe scaling issues with a python service I’m inclined to only write my servers in Go or Rust anymore. It’s only a bit harder and you get something that can grow with you

Rails has ActiveRecord, which has an extremely elegant REPL. It's a delight to use.

Re: We fell out of love with Next.js and back in love with Ruby on Rails

#13
post #4

I switched from Rails to the node.js ecosystem back in the 3.2 to 4 transition, however looking back I share a similar sentiment as the OP. I recently initiated the backmigration and my approach thus far however has been to take out the "administrative" part out into Rails to benefit from all the useful conventions there, but keep the "business services" in JS or Python and have the two communicate. Best of both worl…

Reminds me of what I did to bring AI into my SpringBoot Java app. I just created a Python-based WebService (microservice), that deploys as part of my docker stack, and now I get the benefit of everything going on in the AI world which is mostly Python, with no lag. Meanwhile other Java Develpers are busy trying to port all that stuff over into Java language. To me that porting is just a waste of time. Let AI stay in…

I think that's very smart, thanks for sharing! With the prevalence of coding agents currently the cost of context/language switching is much lower and these best-of-breed multilang setups are likely to become more prevalent in the future.

Re: We fell out of love with Next.js and back in love with Ruby on Rails

#14

Just my opinion but, server‑side rendering never really went away, but the web is finally remembering why it was the default. First paint and SEO are still better when markup comes from the server, which is why frameworks as different as Rails + Turbo, HTMX, Phoenix LiveView, and React Server Components all make SSR the baseline. Those projects have shown that most dashboards and CRUD apps don’t need a client router,…

People also forget just how far you can get without using client side JavaScript at all today. HTML and CSS have a lot of features built in that used to require JavaScript.

Re: We fell out of love with Next.js and back in love with Ruby on Rails

#15

Just my opinion but, server‑side rendering never really went away, but the web is finally remembering why it was the default. First paint and SEO are still better when markup comes from the server, which is why frameworks as different as Rails + Turbo, HTMX, Phoenix LiveView, and React Server Components all make SSR the baseline. Those projects have shown that most dashboards and CRUD apps don’t need a client router,…

I think the confession that "Figma‑ or Gmail‑class apps still benefit from heavy client logic" is a telling one, and the reason I politely disagree with your thinking is that it relies in the app staying small forever. But that's not what happens. Apps grow and grow and grow.

I've heard people say they just want "Pure JS" with no frameworks at all because frameworks are too complex, for their [currently] small app. So they get an app working, and all is good, right until it hits say 5000 lines of code. Then suddenly you have to re-write it all using a framework and TypeScript to do typing. Better to just start with an approach that scales to infinity, so you never run into the brick wall.

Re: We fell out of love with Next.js and back in love with Ruby on Rails

#16

Just my opinion but, server‑side rendering never really went away, but the web is finally remembering why it was the default. First paint and SEO are still better when markup comes from the server, which is why frameworks as different as Rails + Turbo, HTMX, Phoenix LiveView, and React Server Components all make SSR the baseline. Those projects have shown that most dashboards and CRUD apps don’t need a client router,…

I believe allowing the dynamic loading of scripts was a mistake, and we should undo support for it. So were iframes.

Everything after ready should have been static content.

Re: We fell out of love with Next.js and back in love with Ruby on Rails

#19

Just my opinion but, server‑side rendering never really went away, but the web is finally remembering why it was the default. First paint and SEO are still better when markup comes from the server, which is why frameworks as different as Rails + Turbo, HTMX, Phoenix LiveView, and React Server Components all make SSR the baseline. Those projects have shown that most dashboards and CRUD apps don’t need a client router,…

I think the confession that "Figma‑ or Gmail‑class apps still benefit from heavy client logic" is a telling one, and the reason I politely disagree with your thinking is that it relies in the app staying small forever. But that's not what happens. Apps grow and grow and grow. I've heard people say they just want "Pure JS" with no frameworks at all because frameworks are too complex, for their [currently] small app. S…

That’s absurd, that’s like saying we should only use C++ for backend code because my CRUD business app might one day scale to infinity. Better be safe than sorry and sling pointers and CMake just in case I need that extra juice!

Re: We fell out of love with Next.js and back in love with Ruby on Rails

#20

Just my opinion but, server‑side rendering never really went away, but the web is finally remembering why it was the default. First paint and SEO are still better when markup comes from the server, which is why frameworks as different as Rails + Turbo, HTMX, Phoenix LiveView, and React Server Components all make SSR the baseline. Those projects have shown that most dashboards and CRUD apps don’t need a client router,…

Having a server provide an island or rendering framework for your site can be more complex than an SPA with static assets and nginx.

You still have to deal with all the tooling you are talking about, right? You’ve just moved the goalpost to the BE.

And just like the specific use cases you mentioned for client routing I can also argue that many sites don’t care about SEO or first paint so those are non features.

So honestly I would argue for SPA over a server framework as it can dramatically reduce complexity. I think this is especially true when you must have an API because of multiple clients.

I think the DX is significantly better as well with fast reload where I don’t have to reload the page to see my changes.

People are jumping into nextjs because react is pushing it hard even tho it’s a worse product and questionable motives.

Post reply on HN