| ▲ | hungryhobbit 4 hours ago |
| Man, I love Next ... but I also love Vite ... and I hate the Next team, because they focus on fancy new features for 0.1% of their users, at the complete expense of the other 99.9% of the Next community (who they basically ignore). This gives someone like me everything we want. Better performance is something the Next community has been begging for for years: the Next team ignored them, but not the Cloudflare team. Meanwhile Vite is a better core layer than the garbage the Next people use, but you still get the full Next functionality. I wish Cloudflare the best of luck with this fork: I hope it succeeds and gets proven so I can use it at my company! |
|
| ▲ | 3rodents 4 hours ago | parent | next [-] |
| What is it you love about Next that isn’t tied to Vercel and isn’t available elsewhere? I love Next too but I find the value is inextricably linked to Vercel. I can’t imagine choosing to use Next if I’m not choosing it for Vercel’s fancy stuff. |
| |
| ▲ | tengbretson an hour ago | parent [-] | | React server components are dope. Server actions are dangerous but powerful. No one has a more mature implementation of either of these than Next. | | |
| ▲ | teaearlgraycold a minute ago | parent | next [-] | | I still just prefer having a more clear separation of concerns with API routes instead of using server components. I want my frameworks to be way less fancy than what Next is pushing out these days. I get the feeling we're dealing with the consequences of Vercel employees needing to justify their promotions. | |
| ▲ | dyllon 10 minutes ago | parent | prev [-] | | Of course no one has a more mature implementation of it than Next. The Next.js team designed it themselves! |
|
|
|
| ▲ | paxys 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| You think you'll get better long-term support from an experiment that a single engineer did in his spare time? |
| |
| ▲ | hu3 3 hours ago | parent [-] | | Isn't that how Linux started? | | |
| ▲ | paxys 3 hours ago | parent [-] | | No, not at all | | |
| ▲ | hungryhobbit 3 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | Actually, that's exactly how it started: read Linus Torvalds' "Just for Fun". | | |
| ▲ | paxys 3 hours ago | parent [-] | | Was Linux owned by a large company? Was the maintainer getting paychecks from that company? Was it profit motivated? Was it released as an AI experiment? If the similarity is "they are both open source projects" then so are about a million others. 99.99% of them don't get any traction beyond the first week. | | |
| ▲ | rovr138 2 hours ago | parent [-] | | The similarity is to, > You think you'll get better long-term support from an experiment that a single engineer did in his spare time? Linus started it as an experiment. That's a single engineer doing it on his spare time. Do you think Linux doesn't do long-term support right? The one changing the goal post is you. https://github.com/cloudflare/vinext It is MIT licensed. It can be used and maintained by anyone. If it'll get adoption like Linux did, that's different. But the base is there. |
|
| |
| ▲ | hu3 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | For all I know Linux started a hobby project from one person. So entertain me if you disagree. |
|
|
|
|
| ▲ | qudat 4 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| Next is the worst framework I’ve ever used next to rails. It’s pure overhead for most apps. |
| |
| ▲ | lateforwork 3 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | Try mvc-router, see here: https://github.com/wisercoder/mvc-router/tree/master/DemoApp... React was originally meant to be the 'V' in MVC. You can still use it that way and React becomes very simple when you only use it for UI. Why do data fetching in a React component? | |
| ▲ | JustSkyfall 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | Rails 8 is surprisingly good nowadays. It absolutely still has its share of problems (e.g. Bundler being slow, the frontend story being crappy without Inertia, lack of types which is a biggie, memory) but it is still a fantastic framework imo. | | |
| ▲ | dmix 2 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | Why Inertia.js? I quite enjoy not using JS heavy frontends in Rails by leaning on Turbo and light Stimulus JS controllers where needed. My experience going hard into Vue+Rails was full of pain and I've rediscovered why server first makes everything easier to reason about instead of duplicating tons of logic + dealing with constant async issues (particularly around automated testing and complex data loading). | | |
| ▲ | moviedo an hour ago | parent [-] | | Inertia because it’s a plug-in replacement for ruby html templating aka erb. Try it out, it’s basically the same stuff you get from erb, without the need for Turbo’s web sockets. You get server side rendering, all the great BE stuff like server side validation, but no SPA headache. I find the best DX with Adonis/nodejs and typescript. |
| |
| ▲ | igravious an hour ago | parent | prev [-] | | Somebody should port uv to Ruby :/ | | |
| |
| ▲ | vlucas 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | The basic premise of Next is good, but it definitely has more overhead that in should, has odd "middleware", and is very hard to optimize. I view this mostly as a React problem though since any page requires full hydration and ships everything to the client. RSCs are... not my favorite for sure. I too have been very frustrated by this, and I made an "Astro for dynamic sites" TypeScript framework called Hyperspan ( https://www.hyperspan.dev ) that aims to fill the gap in the JS ecosystem for a modern fully dynamic option that, similar to Astro, makes dynamic islands easy. I have enjoyed using it in all my own projects. Check it out if you want. | | |
| ▲ | switz an hour ago | parent [-] | | RSC by design does not ship everything to the client. That's one of its basic premises. It ships markup, composed in client interactivity, but you can shed a lot of the code required curate that markup. |
| |
| ▲ | neya 40 minutes ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | If Rails is considered a worse framework, then I'm pretty much speechless. Not everything has to be about performance. Security is a thing too. | | |
| ▲ | DoesntMatter22 33 minutes ago | parent [-] | | Rails powers nearly 15 percent of the US e-commerce. I love it. Any time I have to use another framework it feels like a huge downgrade. Rails has so many things that make it nice to use |
| |
| ▲ | christophilus 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | It’s unbelievably terrible. I don’t understand its success at all, as much as I’ve tried. |
|
|
| ▲ | thousand_nights 4 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| at my job we have some 7+ year old nextjs apps that don't receive new features but still do their jobs perfectly fine, and they keep changing random shit around for no reason, we've had to waste time on multiple refactors already for major nextjs version bumps once the older ones are no longer supported |
| |
| ▲ | mikestorrent 2 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | Is there any front end framework that doesn't do this? I dropped out of the front end years ago, and it seems to just get worse every year with a profusion of confusion. Doesn't anyone yearn for back when we didn't have to build the front end at all?? Just emit some HTML and serve up some JS files from the backend, and everything just flows from there? Someone go make an AI rewrite of Apache+Mod-PHP and sell it to zoomers as the hip new thing already please | | |
| ▲ | nicoburns an hour ago | parent | next [-] | | > Is there any front end framework that doesn't do this? React, if you are judicious about what additional packages you use on top of it. > I dropped out of the front end years ago, and it seems to just get worse every year with a profusion of confusion. This has actually gotten somewhat better in recent years starting with esbuild which made it possible to use a simple single-binary tool for bundling. | |
| ▲ | kopirgan an hour ago | parent | prev [-] | | What do you use?! |
| |
| ▲ | hinkley an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | Sounds like Tapestry. Had a friend who loved it but he stopped talking about it after the 4th major architecture shift. | |
| ▲ | IgorPartola 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | Is there any reason to keep upgrading if the apps keep doing their jobs perfectly fine? Pull in a stable version of the framework and the associated docs and stay there. | | |
|
|
| ▲ | chris37879 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| It may be sacrilege to bring it into this conversation, but I've spent the last year building a fairly large community site in Nuxt, vite has been wonderful, though I prefer vue over react. I am a little annoyed I paid for NuxtUI Pro like 3 months before it became free, but whatever. |
|
| ▲ | anonzzzies 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| I don't get it, honest question (like the others), what exactly do you love? |
|
| ▲ | aleksandrh 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| Weird, I hate Next and I love Vite. We have a big (I mean _really_ big) production app that runs on Next.js at work and it's the slowest thing I've ever worked on. I had to upgrade my machine to an M4 Pro just to get local dev compile times down from 5-8 minutes to ~30-60 seconds per route. And my hot refreshes are down from ~15-20 seconds to 5-10. It's _bad_. All the Next.js team does is give you the run-around and link to their docs and say here, try these steps, you're probably doing something wrong, etc. Nope. The framework is just slow. They use simple toy apps to demo how fast it is, but nobody tells you how slow it is at scale. |
| |
|
| ▲ | impulser_ 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| Yeah, Vercel should have done this with NextJS a while ago. There is a reason why quite literally every other framework uses Vite because it amazing, easy to use, and easy to extend. Everything just becomes a plugin. |
|
| ▲ | himata4113 4 hours ago | parent | prev [-] |
| I mean you don't want really want to use javascript for the backend anyway... What's the problem with just using vite and any backend of your choosing? |