3 ms·
What the author fails to realize is that being popular (I.e. shared language and network effects) is extremely valuable. With React you know it will work and s
by ZephyrBlu 4y ago
What the author fails to realize is that being popular (I.e. shared language and network effects) is extremely valuable.
With React you know it will work and scale (In terms of your organization) well. You cannot say the same for many other frameworks yet. For a company that has pretty generic frontend needs React is probably the best choice.
- rk06 4y agoYeah, you can point out ae many flaws as you want, but popularity, longevity, and inertia are the main business priorities. Before React, angular js was popular for this very reason despite its well known issues and digest cycle headaches Technical merits are secondary concerns and only become primary when software engineers are empowered to make these decisions
- whatarethembits 4y agoThis. Vast majority of the companies out there are NOT software companies. Meaning, they don’t have full time developers, at least none with decent experience, on a full time payroll. Their internal tools/portals/sites are either maintained by contractors every now and then or junior developers/interns. In these cases, popularity of a technology, documentation, ease of hire, being able to hit the ground running etc are far important than a slightly smaller bundle size and a few extra ms response time. It’s a difference between being able to hire someone easily and not i.e being able to develop features vs months of delays and cost in order to hire a senior “efficient” dev for one of the lesser known platforms. Choice of tech stack falls somewhere middle or bottom of the list of things to consider when delivering a solution/product. Good enough is good enough. Other factors are far more dominant after a certain point.