I find Remix really nice to work with, it’s a framework that embraces and utilizes web standards (what the article is arguing we should get back to doing more), and I’ve learned everything I know about it (and the majority of everything else I know about front end dev) for free. It’s not like you need to purchase courses to learn. At the same time, I don’t think there’s anything wrong with selling courses to teach people about a framework. But the idea that the entire thing was created just to sell courses about it is not true.

But I do agree that there’s just way too much fast moving, breaking changes on front end in general, frameworks released every other week, etc…

But it _doesn't_ use web standards. It has it's own mental model and gotchas just like any other framework.

It does. It bridges a purely server-rendered architecture with a SPA really nicely, and does it mostly with web standards. You don't need to run any client-side JS with a Remix app. It's not perfect, but there are a lot of benefits to its approach.

I won't try to argue there's no front-end treadmill: there absolutely is, and I had to laugh reading the current top comment because I just had to migrate off Apollo CLI at work.

But this "The web was perfect in 1999--stop changing things!" take is tedious and intellectually lazy. (I'm not accusing you of it, but it's certainly a common sentiment.)

We should be working together to solve concrete problems, and avoid both chasing the latest fads and pretending there's no room for improvement.

It’s a nuanced topic. If we want to dive in, I can provide a glimpse into the first layer of the anus as we stick our head into it.

When we shepherded a lot of sheep into frontend via these courses and boot camps and quasi courses/bootcamps in the form of certain frameworks (hey, you only know this one framework?), we created a cohort of something.

Now what is that something? It’s not really the tinkerer that loves doing this stuff and would have found a way to express themselves (please pay attention to the word “express”, as in, can’t help it). That something was … a pragmatic identity. A pragmatic identity was formed where “I am now a software engineer because I and my cohort agree, we really know how to do our stuff”.

Such a cohort can only be fueled by identity, not passion. This cohort can’t innovate and must cling to the identity of their original accreditation, so they will always be defensive.

That’s the first layer of the asshole as we enter it, it goes deeper. The second layer involves large amounts of money and people’s livelihoods, to which they’d defend unto death.

I don't believe you want to have a productive conversation about this. It sounds like you just want to be angry.

Okay? I'm having a lot of fun talking about some of the parts of our circus. I can't change anything. There will be new cult leaders (evangelists) for frameworks, and new cohorts, we can't change the past. Just pay attention to the rough framework (no pun intended, swear) as it happens again, and try our best to call it out, because it didn't always lead to great outcomes.

Money will be made on all sides regardless and we will all be fine financially. I'm talking about something else, inner. The infinite anus, asshole, is real - but now I'm just projecting.

> mostly with web standards

IMO, the pain from "mostly" starts to show when integrating React Router v6 with legacy frameworks and applications. I'm sure if you go all in on React Router v6 it's great.

At my $DAYJOB we are migrating to Remix w/ GraphQL Federation. It's been a pain.

Especially because we haven't finished any of these migrations:

* ExtJS -> JQuery

* JQuery -> React class components

* React class components -> MobX-observed components

* Observable MobX components -> functional React components with context

* Functional React Components with context -> React Router v6

* React Router v6 -> Remix w/ GraphQL federation

I understand my situation is unique - I'm just bitter from needing to know ~6 different frontend technologies at once. Let alone all the Not-Invented-Here-Syndrome abominations in our codebase.

Remix already has data loading, why add GraphQL? It's a pain in the ass to work with from my brief experience.

That's my point exactly. I have the same questions from leadership.

your last note that adds not-invented-here abominations… if chasing endless frameworks of the month is bad, and building stuff in house is bad, then what do you propose to avoid making this mess?

Skip a couple framework versions and indeed entire frameworks. Maybe go a couple years before you "upgrade" to something else. It is entirely possible you could go as much as 5 or 10 years on something. You'll still have to evaluate and potentially mitigate some CVE's. But that could actually be less work and less aggravating.

I would propose that if you want to change frameworks, actually complete the migration from one technology to the other.

My problem is having all of them existing at once.

It's not that unique. The one enterprise app I worked on (that was started with Rails 1) had all of: Prototype, jQuery, Backbone, Angular, React, Handlebars AND mustache, vanilla CSS, SASS, CSS in JS (or whatever it's called). I wouldn't be surprised if they've introduced Tailwind at this point.

This is also a project started w/ Rails 1, so I feel our experiences may be similar.

To be fair to both code bases - it's very impressive that they're still running, right?

Definitely!

It actually wasn't even THAT bad considering how huge it is. People still complained (admittedly myself included), but it had been TDD'd from the start so had very good test coverage, at least. Also, some people who had worked on really massive Java applications called it "really good!" so it's all about perspective, I suppose :)

But it's based on the fetch standard and formData submission. You're literally running a server that handles those two things.

My point being, it's "based on" Web Standards, it is _not_ Web Standards.

What if I use `fetcher.submit(data, { encType: "application/json" })`? Why not just use fetch directly at that point? I believe it adds a layer of indirectness that just wasn't there before.

If web standards are so important, why don't we use `window.fetch` and `new FormData()` directly instead of wrapping it?

My favorite example of this being JSON gets converted to FormData on the frontend, which then gets POST-ed to the server, which then converts it to JSON on the backend.

I think you're mistaken. I can't comment on the quality of Kent C. Dodds' educational content, but his formal affiliation with Remix was short-lived. The courses that he sells have no apparent affiliation with Remix (the open source project or the company).

Incidentally, Remix is an open source project started by the React Router devs to create more framework features around React Router. React Router is probably one of the most widely deployed JavaScript libraries ever and is the furthest thing imaginable from a project created by grifters to sell online courses.

Remix was also a company that raised a $3 million seed round and then was acquired by Shopify (for presumably much more than $3 million). Shopify appears to continue to invest heavily in Remix and React Router development, and appears to use Remix heavily.

While his formal affiliation may have been short-lived, do you think he got a cut of the sale to Shopify?

If so, not disclosing that when he promotes Remix is a bit shady.

Nice dude and all, but that is one thing I take issue with still.

I don't think it's weird to like a piece of software and have that lead you to work at the company that builds the software and also to develop an educational course about that software.

Not weird to do all that. Just weird to not disclose it.

There are only a few popular, promoted alternatives to NextJS right now (that I know of): Remix and TanStack. That is, if you're fully React focused, ofc. I dont see promoting Remix as a red flag.

Promoting it? No problem. But promoting something you profited from without disclosing it violates FCC rules for broadcasting. I would say influencers aren't technically broadcasting but they are in principle.

> React Router is probably one of the most widely deployed JavaScript libraries ever and is the furthest thing imaginable from a project created by grifters to sell online courses.

This is a funny example (to me) because in 2017, one of the two co-creators of React Router (Michael) came to my job and gave a two or three-day in-person training course on React. I think he also covered Redux and React Router. We had a great time getting to know him.

It turns out that Ryan and Michael spent a substantial amount of time and effort on a side business called React Training. It is fair to say that their speaking engagements were a solid revenue stream, but agreed - definitely not grifters.

This is gross. Friends.

Not sure it's fair to characterize a repo with 6k + commits and the last being 10 hours ago as "pure grift".

E.g. react-router was ready 5990 commits ago. It is a grift, they keep rewriting it and reengineering the API over and over and over again just to be able to sell more training.

Look at wouter for what is possible if your motivation isn't selling training material. It was written and left alone, it works just as well, it's stable and doesn't change for no reason.

Do you know anyone who bought courses on react-router? The documentation is right there for free.

React Router was made by retarded people.

Wasn't react-training.com owned by the react-router people? I wonder what the training consultants recommended to use for routing...

And what's wrong with that? It works good if you're building an SPA in React.

You asked if react-router team sold courses, they sold consulting services. Seems like a conflict of interest to sell consulting on a tool you built while introducing breaking changes (but hey if you need quick help throw us a few dozen grand).

I guess that's fine for you but it's very smarmy IMO.

They also post (free) documentation how to migrate from the previous major version

You know you can just read rfc's right? there is a reason they update the thing, because people use it. https://github.com/remix-run/react-router/discussions/catego...

I think that adds to my point. How does that have so many stars on github? The customers "star" it. Who uses this on a real app? It's alright to slowly accept the bitter truth that grifting scales.

Not really sure that's relevant. Grift implies an intentional value extraction without providing anything. Using your example: I'm confident that the time spent working on remix and courses related to it resulted in far less monetary gain than spinning out courses on React. If you think Remix is misguided or a bad framework etc... that is very different from grifting. A corollary: Is Deno a grift because it shares the same creator as Node and has a paid product attached to it? In my opinion no but you might disagree... I'm mostly opposed to the idea remix in particular exists purely as a grift - love it or hate it there are far easier ways for someone with the influence of Kent to make money.

Imagine someone made Deno with a corresponding course to go along with it. I would consider that a grift.

https://frontendmasters.com/courses/remix/

That was the end goal for this whole thing. I do look at the pricing page (what are you trying to sell constantly?) on anything people put up on the internet and judge from there. You can have the last word and put in a testimonial for Remix, since I won't be budging on this. It's a rabbit hole for both you and me to keep going at this, as I've seen enough of this pattern. Consider me a neural net on this front (end).

I'm not interested in writing a testimonial for Remix, merely commenting on the absurdity of calling a project of this scale as nothing more than a grift to sell educational content. There's no reference to these paid courses anywhere on the landing page, there's no callout for paid courses in the main navigation. The only mention of tutorials at all is buried in the community section which leads to: https://remix.guide/ which seems to be unaffiliated with the Remix team, and has no section advertising paid courses anywhere. You're talking about a framework that has been acquired and subsequently used in production by a global company in Shopify - clearly there is something to the framework beyond being a vehicle for tutorial sales.

Again, I want to be clear: This is NOT an endorsement of Remix. Your line of thinking seems to be conspiratorial and not grounded in reality. You mention repeatedly about pricing and the end goal of funneling noobs toward course purchases... One would assume that in conspiring to sell courses the team behind Remix might actually advertise that they have courses for sale on their website.

I have to be honest as a third party that a. doesn't work with remix, b. doesn't know anyone who works on remix, c. doesn't know you - it seems like you have a personal vendetta.

No personal vendetta. We sit here and punch the mysterious air as to why things are the way they are. I thought maybe we'd punch up at something that is plausibly a culprit. I'll admit it may be punching down, since this is just one dude. But then again, it's one dude who influenced a lot of people ...

We can't just keep sitting here and blaming developers for being

1) New

2) Dumb

3) FOMO

4) Dumb

5) Unqualified

You understand? It's worth looking at what content they are consuming and where the mindshare is being promoted from. It's worth asking who is selling them the idea of these frameworks.

> We can't just keep sitting here and blaming developers for being New / Dumb …

Well, as a cohort, I think the ratio of inept programmers to skilled programmers stays mostly constant regardless of stuff like this. Like, if programming is hard to learn, fewer people will try and learn it. But also the skill bar goes up - so people spend more time as inept developers before they’re skilled. Likewise if programming gets easier to learn, we get a swell of fresh faces eager to become frontend developers. And the ratio stays more or less the same. It’s kinda like a sales funnel, or a hiring funnel. You always have more leads in your funnel than conversions. (And if you don’t, you’re in trouble!)

We live in an anti gatekeeper era. Content is free, but nobody protects you from wasting your time watching edutainment. The downside of that is real - lots of people waste countless hours larping as students. But the upside is real too. It’s easier than ever to learn anything.

>Grift implies an intentional value extraction without providing anything.

Is it without providing anything, or a value extraction greater than what one is providing?

If the former, it makes the definition very each to check, but it almost makes it very easy to avoid grifting by providing even the most minimal value, and leads use to needing a new word for providing some value but extracting more than provided (perhaps intention should be included). If that is the case, might I suggest "jrift"?

And what have you put out into the world?

I called out a grifter.

And what have you put out into the world?

I push back on stuff like this so developers who feel the feet on their throat from this culture can have some confidence to nudge the boot off.

There goes my hero: https://youtu.be/EqWRaAF6_WY

I can tell you that your response is at least relevant for me because I happen to be working with Remix right now, not because of any influencers but just because I happen to be working on a Shopify project. I've seen lots of frameworks come and go and evolve, so I'm not surprised that this one changes a lot, but I always enjoy getting opinions from people with experience. Whether or not I'll end up resenting it in the future, I don't know, but at least I'll have been warned.

In case anyone isn't familiar with remix, bloomingkales seemingly has no familiarity with the framework. Obviously it's not been created as a conspiracy to sell training courses. The idea is ludicrous.

It's quite a nice framework. It's easy to learn, straightforward, the people in their discord are very helpful. It has the backing of a large company (shopify) who are using it extensively.

It is, I'll say again, obviously not a conspiracy to sell training courses.

I get why you might feel that way. Ryan and Michael used to run a company based around React training. They created React Router which some people love to complain about. They've since moved over to working for Shopify. Shopify pays for their development on React Router/Remix. They do NOT sell training anymore.

Kent on the other hand, worked with them for a short time. He makes his living selling training. Filling in a gap (selling training) isn't really a grift is it? The dude's got a family and he's found something he can sell.