4 ms·
I don't see why "rich UI/UX-based applications" is listed as "mobile-first". Sure, GraphQL is probably great for highly dynamic client applications, but why wou
by Vinnl 8y ago
I don't see why "rich UI/UX-based applications" is listed as "mobile-first". Sure, GraphQL is probably great for highly dynamic client applications, but why would that be limited to mobile?
As far as I can tell, GraphQL primarily allows you to trade client flexibility for back-end complexity. If you're willing to take the additional complexity on the back-end, GraphQL allows you API clients to iterate far quicker, and removes (or at least lessens) the dependency of the client on the team maintaining the back-end. If that's not worth it to you, don't use GraphQL.
- i_s 8y agoOften, it isn't on net more complexity on the backend, because the alternative is having to maintain more endpoints.
- sametmax 8y agoIt appeals to big structures, because they often have many clients but much less backend endpoints. If you have one server side code base but targets the web, the mobile, an customer api, a desktop client and embeded devices, it's a net win. However, if you just have web + mobile, the complexity may not be worth it.
- chacham15 8y agoI think the reason which the author glossed over is because it reduces the number of RTTs between the front and back end. On desktop, you typically have a much better internet connection where packets are less likely to get dropped and will generally arrive faster meaning that the performance impact of having a large number of RTTs is much less than on mobile.