I truly have no idea what this person is talking about. My experience with React apps is they become bloated monsters teams hate working on. Next.js is constantly releasing breaking changes and, like all JavaScript projects, if you go more than six months without updating your 14000 dependencies you might as well start the project from scratch again.
Next.js is also tightly coupled with Vercel who would like to sell you more of their service. They aren’t making the best decisions “for the community” it’s the same trick we’ve seen a million times. “Quick, everyone adopt our thing then we’ll turn the billing screws later”.
Rails still matters because it still powers a huge swath of valuable and highly profitable companies and it continues to add amazing features that are best in class. It’s predictable and easy to be productive. It also has a very understood scaling story from one server to 5000.
This article really suffers from Rails being compared only against one other “stack”, most likely because that’s what the author is familiar with, and the end is a bit confused. Breaking the advantages of “contemporary” tool chains a bit more instead of just saying “next.js” would probably create a better bit by bit comparison. It also helps the people who use other tools, both to see where they’re on the “dichotomy” (“We use Spring Boot, are we on the Rails or Next.Js end?”) and to prevent easy “wins” (“Well, we use nßxt.js, not next.js, which is completely different and thus the best of all possible worlds!”).
Never mind the point of view of the many millions of devs who aren’t as concerned with the “trillion dollar startup world”…
[citation needed]
To put it bluntly, this has been the exact opposite of my experience with React apps in general.
GitHub’s backend component system was rock-solid for many years, and now that they’re moving to React it’s been weird and buggy all over the place.
I truly have no idea what this person is talking about. My experience with React apps is they become bloated monsters teams hate working on. Next.js is constantly releasing breaking changes and, like all JavaScript projects, if you go more than six months without updating your 14000 dependencies you might as well start the project from scratch again.
Next.js is also tightly coupled with Vercel who would like to sell you more of their service. They aren’t making the best decisions “for the community” it’s the same trick we’ve seen a million times. “Quick, everyone adopt our thing then we’ll turn the billing screws later”.
Rails still matters because it still powers a huge swath of valuable and highly profitable companies and it continues to add amazing features that are best in class. It’s predictable and easy to be productive. It also has a very understood scaling story from one server to 5000.
This article really suffers from Rails being compared only against one other “stack”, most likely because that’s what the author is familiar with, and the end is a bit confused. Breaking the advantages of “contemporary” tool chains a bit more instead of just saying “next.js” would probably create a better bit by bit comparison. It also helps the people who use other tools, both to see where they’re on the “dichotomy” (“We use Spring Boot, are we on the Rails or Next.Js end?”) and to prevent easy “wins” (“Well, we use nßxt.js, not next.js, which is completely different and thus the best of all possible worlds!”).
Never mind the point of view of the many millions of devs who aren’t as concerned with the “trillion dollar startup world”…
[Comment removed by author]