3 ms·

I have a problem taking seriously any article that spreads FUD by accusing their targets of spreading FUD. The people who build React and the related ecosystem

I have a problem taking seriously any article that spreads FUD by accusing their targets of spreading FUD. The people who build React and the related ecosystem are incredibly smart people trying to make the web better. I'm certain there's no ill-intent in their motives. Regardless, they open source pretty aggressively. If an open technology from Facebook displaces another open technology from another source, I don't understand why we should be upset simply because the backer of the more popular technique was Facebook.

eropple 11y ago
This site has a habit of doing that, it seems: https://twitter.com/vjeux/status/655128064754499588 https://twitter.com/vjeux/status/655128064754499588 The reasoning in all three of those posts feels super shallow; I have the most experience with React, and he's setting off a bunch of alarms in my head. "We don't need React because we have Web Components"--if Web Components were as high-perf ("they're getting faster so we don't need workarounds") or as just-plain-easy to work with (crickets!) even for a JavaScript dolt like me, maybe that'd be true. "But but open, but Facebook evil" is not a good-enough reason to use things that don't offer clear benefits. When Facebook twirls its evil mustachios and suddenly Embraces and Extends with...their...BSD-licensed software, I may worry. Somehow I'm not betting on that. (He might even have a good point about the tight coupling of React, except that React, and indeed all of my JavaScript, is the presentational layer, and anything important is behind the API anyway.)
colbyh 11y ago
Couldn't have said it better myself. I'm sure there are some great points in this post but I can't get over the obviously biased perspective (and borderline ad hominem attacks on FB).
Mikushi 11y ago
The web has been getting worst every year, mostly due to these companies spreading technologies to fix a web that is "broken" but who nobody but themselves complained about. I agree wholeheartedly with OP, Facebook & cie might have problems with certain components of the web, but they are neither broken or in need of a fix, that it doesn't fit their need sure, but their needs are, well, theirs. I can count on one hand the number of tech that came out in the past 5 or 6 years that are actually an improvement on the old if you are not Google or Facebook. What OP should have said may be is, stop trying to pass your problems as everyones problems. 99.9% of the web can function with the way the web was 5 years ago, if not more. Hell I was operating at high scale using standard stacks 7 years ago and I don't see why or how the situation has changed at all to warrant any of the bullshit technologies that are constantly touted as a fix. Developing for the web has become more of a nightmare than anything else because of the likes of Twitter, Facebook or Google pushing their stack on people who never needed it.
- TazeTSchnitzel 11y ago
  Are Facebook actually passing their own problems as everyone's? They're making technologies which suit their needs better, and other people can use them too, but they're not forcing them on anyone.
dustingetz 11y ago
They appear to be middle-level freelancers, where convincing your clients that you are really smart and making a lot of noise in social media is more important than actually being really smart. (I am also a freelancer, so i'm not trying to be snarky so much as point out the incentives, the article is clearly not meant for HN)
danpalmer 11y ago
> If an open technology from Facebook displaces another open technology from another source, I don't understand why we should be upset simply because the backer of the more popular technique was Facebook. Facebook's future does not depend on the web being open, and in fact depends to some extent on it being quite a closed system. This makes them a poor choice of steward for core technologies in my opinion. I think the article's point is that the open technology from Facebook is a poor one in the wider context of the open web, and therefore if it does displace other models, that will slow us down and cause issues in the long run.

eropple 11y ago

This site has a habit of doing that, it seems: https://twitter.com/vjeux/status/655128064754499588 https://twitter.com/vjeux/status/655128064754499588 The reasoning in all three of those posts feels super shallow; I have the most experience with React, and he's setting off a bunch of alarms in my head. "We don't need React because we have Web Components"--if Web Components were as high-perf ("they're getting faster so we don't need workarounds") or as just-plain-easy to work with (crickets!) even for a JavaScript dolt like me, maybe that'd be true. "But but open, but Facebook evil" is not a good-enough reason to use things that don't offer clear benefits. When Facebook twirls its evil mustachios and suddenly Embraces and Extends with...their...BSD-licensed software, I may worry. Somehow I'm not betting on that. (He might even have a good point about the tight coupling of React, except that React, and indeed all of my JavaScript, is the presentational layer, and anything important is behind the API anyway.)

colbyh 11y ago

Couldn't have said it better myself. I'm sure there are some great points in this post but I can't get over the obviously biased perspective (and borderline ad hominem attacks on FB).

Mikushi 11y ago

The web has been getting worst every year, mostly due to these companies spreading technologies to fix a web that is "broken" but who nobody but themselves complained about. I agree wholeheartedly with OP, Facebook & cie might have problems with certain components of the web, but they are neither broken or in need of a fix, that it doesn't fit their need sure, but their needs are, well, theirs. I can count on one hand the number of tech that came out in the past 5 or 6 years that are actually an improvement on the old if you are not Google or Facebook. What OP should have said may be is, stop trying to pass your problems as everyones problems. 99.9% of the web can function with the way the web was 5 years ago, if not more. Hell I was operating at high scale using standard stacks 7 years ago and I don't see why or how the situation has changed at all to warrant any of the bullshit technologies that are constantly touted as a fix. Developing for the web has become more of a nightmare than anything else because of the likes of Twitter, Facebook or Google pushing their stack on people who never needed it.

TazeTSchnitzel 11y ago
Are Facebook actually passing their own problems as everyone's? They're making technologies which suit their needs better, and other people can use them too, but they're not forcing them on anyone.

dustingetz 11y ago

They appear to be middle-level freelancers, where convincing your clients that you are really smart and making a lot of noise in social media is more important than actually being really smart. (I am also a freelancer, so i'm not trying to be snarky so much as point out the incentives, the article is clearly not meant for HN)

danpalmer 11y ago

> If an open technology from Facebook displaces another open technology from another source, I don't understand why we should be upset simply because the backer of the more popular technique was Facebook. Facebook's future does not depend on the web being open, and in fact depends to some extent on it being quite a closed system. This makes them a poor choice of steward for core technologies in my opinion. I think the article's point is that the open technology from Facebook is a poor one in the wider context of the open web, and therefore if it does displace other models, that will slow us down and cause issues in the long run.