As a developer, I fully understand that the nails and girders used to assemble a building aren't expected to reflect the preferences embodied by the final const

As a developer, I fully understand that the nails and girders used to assemble a building aren't expected to reflect the preferences embodied by the final construction they contribute to, but would you just look at the React website, and stand it next to Facebook itself? One looks and feels like shit, and the other does not. I'm just one guy with an opinion, but I strongly disagree that Facebook is a model example of a complex website. Facebook is blessed with a money hose, that ultimately washes away so many other problems, meanwhile provided that Facebook is not a network hardware and CDN company, I'd contest that if that's what they wind up bragging about, incidentally, then that's clearly a hint that they've gotten their core offerings wrong. Yes, Facebook started as a PHP garbage pile, and now it's got more going on, but the surface UX of Facebook remains a garbage pile, whether it's a fast garbage pile in terms of line speed, or a photo-realistic representation of a virtual garbage pile. If I can get consistent browsing results, productive interactions, and notice a presentable style and appearance on a React documentation website, which is a wholly-owned property of Facebook, then why isn't the flagship Facebook system provided to end-users with the same nuanced attention to detail?