We're kind of into the next generation of frameworks (Solid, Svelte 3, Vue 3) and that's more about how much JS is getting delivered to the client. The current area of exploration is "partial hydration" where the goal is to write stuff using the component model but do server rendering and only send JS for the parts of the page that'll change client side. For quite a few classes of application this would substantially reduce the size of JS over the wire. All this is less of a benefit than the state control React brought so I expect slower/partial adoption.

More broadly, there's been a resurgence of the render everything on the server and send html diffs approach in the form of alpine and htmx. The other potential area for change on the horizon is web assembly getting host bindings support so it doesn't have to bridge through JS to affect the DOM and other browser APIs.

Maybe one or two years after that.

It's not that bad. I am lead on a large Angular 13 project and we love it, easy to work with, build, deploy. We have literally no issues at the moment. .Net 6 C# APIs on the back-end, Oracle database. It just works.

Take everything with a grain of salt.

Eg: Google Cloud console downloads like 20MB of resources.

Maybe the DX is good, but from an end user perspective, Angular is far from good.

That's literally the biggest (publicly known) Angular app in existence, and the fact that it's slow doesn't have anything to do with Angular. E.g. FWD:Everyone pages load in well under half a second:

https://www.fwdeveryone.com/t/K3KKGbMyQbaCGDc-izuaow/venmo-f...

At this point the main things preventing it from being faster are the TTFB from CloudFront, and the fact that Bootstrap is used as a dependency.

That must be a fairly large application. Consider they are pushing it internally, I have no idea how optimized that is.

When you consider this is cached, that means you only have to do that once until an update. Similar to any other software.

Look at what Electron apps do in terms of constant updates. This is similar, but it's a web page.

And the problem is not only the bytes loaded but how clunky and slow it is in general.

The Electron argument doesn't make any sense as it includes two runtimes ffs.

I just don't get the concept of people being like, I'm going to start a project that's likely going to take the ten years to become successful, but I'm not willing to spend the twenty hours to read the documentation so that it will be successful.

Last I asked, it was still a tire fire, even after more than a dozen versions and after a fully mature previous framework that was replaced :-(

Basically, they now (as of Angular 12) force you to build a difference version of your app for each language you support, and either serve them up at different URLs or use cookies to serve up the right version to each user. The technical reasons make sense...your translations occur at build-time, rather than at run-time, but it's a pretty drastic change that occurred out of nowhere.

Not a fan.

I use ttag (https://ttag.js.org) with React and like it. I don’t see any reason you couldn’t use it (or another library) with Angular.

Well, kinda? I tried to set up typescript, storyboard and tailwind the other day, via create-react-app - and it's not really clear if I can/should use npm or yarn, and what, if any bundles like webpack or esbuild/craco I need... Nor did any of the documentation/tutorials "just work" - and as final punishment I think I had to download more than a gig of dependencies.

I get that there are many layers of tooling, but when I can't seem to get half the features of qt, nor a gui for 4gl development - it does seem like there's a lot of churn and pain for limited gain.

Using Laravel with Breeze and the set up just works out of the box.

The real difficulty is that web UIs have to be very flexible and varied: you have different screen sizes, mobile vs desktop, and every website has a different UI vs native apps all looking similar. And yeah, there are over 100 different web frameworks most which have a particular use case, although you don't have to use the perfect tool for the job. Also, there are a few quirks left over from the old days of HTML/CSS/JavaScript.

But making a basic website nowadays on modern tools is very straightforward. Clone a vite starter project, write out your DOM in React or Vue or Svelte or Solid.js or whatever, and launch a live-server with a browser inspector to fine-tune the design. There are some especially bad JS frameworks (looking at you Meteor), but that's the case for most platforms.

Made me chuckle. Web frameworks are thin-to-medium layers of dealing with bs that web graphics are by nature and design. Their entire purpose orbits around that. Runtimes that do not suffer from these birth traumas don’t even need all that complexity. E.g. with apple core ui libraries you can in hours design a new flex/grid/stack/align/etc geometry container (which takes decades in the web), can animate things, make them cheap-scrollable, sizeable, constrainable out of box. Do you really think that web reflows and size dispatch up and down a hierarchy is a complex issue which only a “top-notch” web tech can solve?

Of course web traditionally was more game-like and does not have any guidelines and presentation standards beyond “reset”, allowing to focus on design better than the rest of the world (and due to widespread nature monopolized by a single platform), but calling frameworks which basically deal with its own shortcomings and ancient issues ahead of the world is pretty misleading.

What exactly is ahead of the world in there? My bet is on reactivity, components, caching and lazy redraws, which “weren’t a thing” before web, because, you know, jquery and comctl32.dll were bad.

making a basic website nowadays on modern tools is very straightforward … and launch a live-server with a browser inspector to fine-tune the design

Ah yes, something we had at VB/Delphi 3 times but not quite as RAD. I mean, maybe launch a live server, drop a query and see live data in design-mode, or enumerate columns and make some of them editable out of box? Or fill a form with master-detail link? You can’t. Web praises primitive/workaround things which nobody even had a name for before, so trivial and obvious and default it was.