In most cases later frameworks are slow and bulky. I certainly hate using sites like X or Target on mobile. Random delayed loading of things, loss of scrolling position when going back, things just not loading the first time it delayed reactions. It sucks.

This is how you end up with an amalgam of legacy crap that no one wants to touch. I can’t read guarantee you that outside of big tech and a couple of unicorns started by experienced devs this will NEVER work reliably.

eg React Native is dismissed in 5 sentences, with no real solution at all given to the basic problem of wanting to have a website and mobile apps without writing your app 3 times. Let alone a website + mobile apps + windows + mac clients. The suggested solutions do not address this need -- eg there's some Apache crap that no one I've heard of uses (it's renamed Adobe Phonegap crap that Adobe bailed on and tossed over to Apache); some random link to a 5 year old google i/o presentation; etc.

As far as I know, there's basically 3 toolkits that offer this: React + derivates; Rails with Hotwire; and Flutter, which means trusting Google (fools only), and which has recently deprioritized desktop... so that's a rock solid foundation to pour millions of dollars of eng time into. And I guess Xamarin, if anyone is using that.

As for the article, honesty probably would have just had the author write something like: "RN: an unfortunate but maybe your best choice in these circumstances" instead of pretending there's serious alternatives eg the Apache garbage dump.

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!

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...

https://github.com/brillout/awesome-react-components

This point is not directly covered in the article.

that is neither here nor there. you are replying to an article whose thrust is that react ought never be used.

> Somewhere that’s actually an application might

might, lol? wait are you the author?

> most line of business applications would be better as something like Rails views rather than React

why?

And there's also the other side: people who insist in overusing React. Perhaps that's what the author refers to.

I for one have see HTMX eat React for breakfast in a few of my clients during consulting.

i don't know about all that, but this is an incredibly tired diatribe.

> Perhaps that's what the author refers to.

they are clearly not.

"In short, nobody should start a new project in the 2020s based on React. Full stop."

If you struggle with backend code then you’re just not a good backend developer. Maybe just stick to HTML/CSS.

What about the rest of them?

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 of generic wisdom delivered as if it's specific, written with the effort of someone who is proud of themselves when you disagree.

I was not able to notice any difference between them

I don't get what the point of these comments is ? If you're using RPI with a 2g connection you'll have a bad experience shopping at the site ? And somehow that's supposed to factor in to my tech stack decisions ?

Software engineers tend not to experience the web on the same class of device as most of their users.

It's a fair point to note devs and users might have different devices, but in some cases they don't and the decision to use React might be well-founded with that fact.

I find it extremely odd that this was even a question on this site. Do you think the problem you’re solving should impact your tech stack at all, or is your tech stack more important than the problem?

I have a newer iPhone and Safari is still full-refreshing pages constantly due to memory.

With utmost respect, that's not what I'm saying :)

I hold no hot take position on anything web dev, or any firm declarative position.

What I'm trying to get at is, indicia of an article being half-baked includes things like asserting all that's required to agree is to care about the user.

This feels good to say, but doesn't say anything, other than there's been at least some short-circuiting of thought. We can come up with many trivial cases where "caring about users" involves requiring client-side logic during rendering.