Honest question - what’s the point of all this change? At the end of the day, people are building web pages with these frameworks? John Carmack has an excellen

Honest question - what’s the point of all this change? At the end of the day, people are building web pages with these frameworks? John Carmack has an excellent article on static analysis (unrelated to this topic), but there’s this excellent quote: >It is important to say right up front that quality isn't everything, and acknowledging it isn't some sort of moral failing. Value is what you are trying to produce, and quality is only one aspect of it, intermixed with cost, features, and other factors. These JS frameworks and build tools provide far more than just code quality, but what all benefits are they providing that outweigh the cost of, “here is XYZ that you must now figure out, and before you can figure out XYZ, you need to learn A, B, and C”. Stated differently, what exactly is the value? Junior developers make this mistake and unfortunately so many more tenured developers as well. I can understand you want to use the shiny new thing. How often do you replace your toilet or kitchen sink though? Is it worth it? To me, the JS ecosystem has become to complex. Even if you’re building for Amazon or Google scale, you want to think twice about not only the shelf life of these various frameworks but also what are their dependencies, what are their failure modes, and at the end of the day, how are they giving you an ROI if you use the new X framework of the month or year CS Y.