I'm still trying to grasp why these discussions so quickly spin into extremes. The author clearly states her intent in the first paragraph: > With the new vers

I'm still trying to grasp why these discussions so quickly spin into extremes. The author clearly states her intent in the first paragraph: > With the new version I wanted to prove that it was possible to deliver an amazing user experience with a great design while drastically reducing the complexity of the code, maximizing reliability, and minimizing the cost to the end user. She goes on to show us what she did, where it worked and where it didn't. The most important points I take away from her article are: 1. It's quite possible to build nice-feeling (YMMV), non-single-page web-apps without (a ton of) JavaScript 2. Critically evaluate if you need the complexity that an enormous JS framework brings > You probably don't need a "Progressive Web App." Seriously evaluate if your app needs such complexity. This has nothing to do with FAANG. Nobody disputes that there are use cases where it's a really good idea to use React+Redux+Jest+Enzyme+XYZ et al. But _maybe_ (and in my personal experience, in projects significantly smaller than Amazon.com, often) you simply do not need that amount of additional complexity and challenges. It'd be so nice to just accept that the author provides an interesting data point (it can work without JS) in a community strongly biased towards starting projects by importing ~1000 node modules.