undefined | Better HN

0 pointsxcrunner5291y ago0 comments

Yep. A simple shopping site or tweet site doesn’t need to be an “app”. These devs are up their own asses thinking they need an app for their stupid (and simple) idea because it’s easy for them and they are “engineers” and we’re all stuck with delayed reactions, missed/double clicks, and broken middle clicks (X, Target) on every click now. Some app.

0 comments

7 comments · 3 top-level

gejose1y ago· 2 in thread

This reads like the perspective of someone who really doesn't understand nor appreciate the real world complexity and technical trade offs involved in building something like twitter or a shopping site

troad1y ago

> This reads like the perspective of someone who really doesn't understand nor appreciate the real world complexity and technical trade offs involved in building something like twitter or a shopping site

You're describing websites simple enough that they're often used in beginner tutorials for web development.

Online shopping and text-based social networking absolutely and emphatically do not require a spaghetti soup of JavaScript frameworks. These were relatively simple websites to build for decades before web frameworks ever came along.

TheCoelacanth1y ago

Compilers are a common project for university CS students. That doesn't mean GCC is overly complicated.

There's a huge difference between making a simple prototype of a concept and making an actual production app that fulfills a myriad of requirements that help you run a successful business.

1 more reply

para_parolu1y ago· 1 in thread

My bank website uses very old js and no react. Yet middle click doesn’t work (as well as back button). These problems have nothing to do with framework/library.

xcrunner529OP1y ago

It’s what’s encouraged. The react way for links that’s easiest and used in tutorials is one that breaks middle click.

bardak1y ago· 1 in thread

I think I despise throbers and spinners more than slow page loads at this point.

troad1y ago

At least the throbbers and spinners are real. The true evil is "optimistic rendering".

"Our framework is so slow that we can't possibly manipulate data in a reasonable time frame, so we'll just lie to the user and say we did! What could possibly go wrong?"

Also in the running: giving absolutely no indication whatsoever to the user that anything succeeded or failed or is in progress at all (aka the Apple approach).

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse

0 comments

7 comments · 3 top-level

gejose1y ago· 2 in thread

troad1y ago

You're describing websites simple enough that they're often used in beginner tutorials for web development.

TheCoelacanth1y ago

Compilers are a common project for university CS students. That doesn't mean GCC is overly complicated.

There's a huge difference between making a simple prototype of a concept and making an actual production app that fulfills a myriad of requirements that help you run a successful business.

1 more reply

para_parolu1y ago· 1 in thread

My bank website uses very old js and no react. Yet middle click doesn’t work (as well as back button). These problems have nothing to do with framework/library.

xcrunner529OP1y ago

It’s what’s encouraged. The react way for links that’s easiest and used in tutorials is one that breaks middle click.

bardak1y ago· 1 in thread

I think I despise throbers and spinners more than slow page loads at this point.

troad1y ago

At least the throbbers and spinners are real. The true evil is "optimistic rendering".

"Our framework is so slow that we can't possibly manipulate data in a reasonable time frame, so we'll just lie to the user and say we did! What could possibly go wrong?"

Also in the running: giving absolutely no indication whatsoever to the user that anything succeeded or failed or is in progress at all (aka the Apple approach).

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse