←back to thread

Next.js is infuriating

(blog.meca.sh)
1033 points Bogdanp | 1 comments | | HN request time: 0s | source
Show context
YuukiRey ◴[] No.45101009[source]
I 100% agree. I've ran into the same issues, and I would never use Next.js for anything, and I will encourage every team at work to use something else.

In general Next.js has so many layers of abstraction that 99.9999% of projects don't need. And the ones that do are probably better off building a bespoke solution from lower level parts.

Next.js is easily the worst technology I've ever used.

replies(16): >>45101028 #>>45101139 #>>45101375 #>>45101378 #>>45102069 #>>45102103 #>>45102427 #>>45102810 #>>45102903 #>>45103225 #>>45104004 #>>45104045 #>>45105250 #>>45110734 #>>45112201 #>>45126685 #
motorest ◴[] No.45102069[source]
> I 100% agree. I've ran into the same issues, and I would never use Next.js for anything, and I will encourage every team at work to use something else.

Things will get far worse before they get better. Right now, online courses such as the ones in PluralSight are pushing Next.js on virtually all courses related to React. I have no idea what ill-advised train of thought resulted in this sad state of affairs but here we are.

replies(1): >>45102683 #
felipeccastro ◴[] No.45102683[source]
The train of thought is “what is everyone using? I’ll use that too”
replies(4): >>45103142 #>>45103151 #>>45103593 #>>45114186 #
koonsolo ◴[] No.45103151{3}[source]
This coupled with the fact that "web development" now means anything going from a content rich website like a blog, towards some e-shop, all the way to complex applications like ux design, video editing, etc.

It's pretty absurd to have such a broad range of web solutions, and think the same solution can cover everything.

replies(1): >>45104359 #
fragmede ◴[] No.45104359{4}[source]
Why? Microsoft's GUI framework as well as Apple's covered plenty of use cases before the rise of the web browser.
replies(1): >>45105727 #
koonsolo ◴[] No.45105727{5}[source]
Then why did HTML became so popular if win32 or MFC were so great?
replies(2): >>45105799 #>>45112468 #
motorest ◴[] No.45112468{6}[source]
> Then why did HTML became so popular if win32 or MFC were so great?

One of the factors is that web dev pushes for a complete separation of concerns, and thus allows frontend developers to specialize in front end development. Therefore it becomes far easier to hire someone to do frontend work with a webdev background than a win32/MFC background.

Number of applicants is also a big factor. There is far more demand for webdev than pure GUI programming. You can only hire people who show up, and if no one shows up then you need to scramble.

Frontend development is also by far the most expensive part of a project. In projects which use low-level native frameworks you are forced to hire a team for each target platform. Adopting technologies that implement GUIs with webpages running in a WebView allow projects to halve the cost. This is also why technologies like React Native shine.

Also, apps like Visual Studio Code prove that webview-based apps can be both nice to look at and be performant.

It's not capabilities. It's mainly the economics.

replies(1): >>45112917 #
1. koonsolo ◴[] No.45112917{7}[source]
In the win32/MFC days, there was no "front-end developer". There was only HTML and content creators writing it.

Then there came small web applications, and still no "front-end developers", since functionality could only work on the server.

It's only when AJAX was introduced in the mid 2000's that you could start to talk about "front-end developers".

By that time, win32 and MFC was old. We had Java, C# with .net framework, etc.