> HTMX is the Future I'm not seeing it. SPAs can be overly complex and have other issues, but I'm not seeing HTMX as a particular improvement. Also, a bunch o

> HTMX is the Future I'm not seeing it. SPAs can be overly complex and have other issues, but I'm not seeing HTMX as a particular improvement. Also, a bunch of this article doesn't make sense to me. E.g, one of the listed costs of SPAs is managing state on the client and server... but (1) you don't have to -- isn't it rather common to keep your app server stateless? -- and (2) HTMX certainly allows for client-side and server-side state, so I'm not sure how it's improving things. That is, if you want to carefully manage app state, you're going to need a mechanism to do that, and HTMX isn't going to help you. It also doesn't somehow prevent a rats nest of tooling or dependencies. It isn't an application framework, so this all depends on how to solve that. SPA's also aren't inherently "very easy to make [...] incorrectly". Also, the suggested HTMX approach to no browser-side javascript is very crappy. Your app would have to be very specifically designed to not be utterly horrible w/o JS with such an approach and instead be just pretty horrible. There are just so much more straightforward ways to make apps that work well without JS. Also, this isn't exactly a mainstream requirement in my experience. I could go on and on. "caching" - htmx doesn't address the hard part caching. "seo-friendliness" - Like all the benefits here attributed to htmx, htmx doesn't particularly help with this and there are many other available way to achieve it. IDK. These kinds of over-promising hyped up articles give me the feeling the thing being hyped up probably doesn't have a lot of real merit to be explored or else they'd talk about that instead. It also feels dishonest to me, or at least incompetent, so make all of these claims and assertions that aren't really true or aren't really especially a benefit of htmx vs many numerous other options.