> ...encourage those who reach for a SPA for every project to give it a second thought. Every time this subject comes up I always get a sense of "These hipster

> ...encourage those who reach for a SPA for every project to give it a second thought. Every time this subject comes up I always get a sense of "These hipster kids are bad programmers and their react apps are killing the web" from the anti-JS crowd. To me, this feels like the developer equivalent of blaming immigrants and poor people for systemic economic issues. Directing your ire at the "Show HN: Look at my React app" or the kid at your meetup, or even your issue tracker, is an easier target, but not the correct one. People reach for SPAs because: 1. Unified development experience for interactivity provides very good developer ergonomics. 2. Dirt-cheap, stupid-simple, five-nines reliable hosting as static assets on S3 or equivalent. So long as these developer-quality-of-life advantages exist, people will choose them, especially for independent projects. Yes, there are downsides with bloat on initial-load, yes there are web apps that would be better served as server-generated HTML. The "bloat" problem is mostly coming from content-heavy sites from media companies that keep injecting tons of various scripts for ads, tracking, and other BS. These organizations have no excuse, and should definitely not be using an SPA if they are, but they will keep doing it so long as the economic incentives of these scripts persist. Edit: PS, I fully support articles like this and welcome discussion on better ways to build web apps. Hopefully we'll figure out a way to have the best of both worlds. Some attempts have existed but are nascent or die quickly before they can mature. Its a difficult problem.