8 ms·

Nue’s a web framework I’m building to slice through modern web dev bloat. When a Vite/ShadCN/Tailwind button is 40% heavier than a full-blown SPA, it’s time to

Nue’s a web framework I’m building to slice through modern web dev bloat. When a Vite/ShadCN/Tailwind button is 40% heavier than a full-blown SPA, it’s time to do things differently. We’re retooling from the ground up—web standards first, no bloat. It’s for frontend architects, design engineers, and UX folks craving simpler, saner workflows. Still in progress, but the shift’s coming. Curious to hear your thoughts!

whatever1 2y ago
How is Vite relevant to the discussion? It's like saying the UI based on Visual Studio is lighter.
- tipiirai 2y ago
  Because Vite emphasizes "Optimized build" in their marketing
  - notpushkin 2y ago
    Slower builds might make developers more thoughtful of the bloat, but I still think it’s tangential. That said, how does Nue compare to, say, Svelte?
  - isqueiros 2y ago
    I'm not sure if I got this correctly, but it seems like you're misunderstanding what Vite actually is or does. For having built what is essentially a bundler, I would've guessed you were more familiar with what it does, or, perhaps even have used it to build your tool. Vite can bundle framework-less html files. It can create an SPA without any JS faff. You just have to point it to the right direction. When you instantiate a Vite app, you have to make the conscious decision to use React under the hood. As for Nue, I think it's a cool idea, but I don't see what it does that I couldn't do with Astro, which has way larger community support and can work with pretty much all JS frameworks OOB. BTW, I think it's really disingenuous to compare a React SPA bundle with an SSG output. You have essentially no functionality for handling state mutations beside events. You could achieve a much better middle ground by using a compiled framework like Svelte or Solid.
- mrcsharp 2y ago
  I'd argue that UIs built in Visual Studio are a lot more performant and lightweight than Electron apps.
n2d4 2y ago
What do you mean by "lighter than a React button"? Do you mean lighter than the entire React runtime, plus a React button? If so, that's somewhat disingenuous because even though a page with a single button would require the entire runtime, a second React button would be significantly cheaper than that.
- tipiirai 2y ago
  Yes. React runtime included. Benchmark and details here: https://nuejs.org/docs/react-button-vs-nue.html https://nuejs.org/docs/react-button-vs-nue.html
  - Fulgen 2y ago
    As the previous commenter said - you don't need a new runtime instance per button, so the comparison doesn't really work (for the smallest binary size, you could provide a native application doing the bare minimum to display the UI too, if the platform has an OS-provided UI framework). It's still a neat toolkit, since not every website needs a big framework - but comparing runtime sizes is like choosing C over C++ because a `int main() { printf("Hello World\n"); }` binary is smaller.
    - audunw 2y ago
      I think it's relevant in the sense that it shows if you're building a simple app, there's a lot of overhead. It doesn't claim that you're going to get that overhead for every time you instance a button. I don't see how anyone would think that. I think the comparison works fairly well. It should be clear to everyone that it compares apples and oranges, since it's two different kind of apps it's comparing. So it makes you think. If they just compared the size of the framework itself, or a single button vs a single button, you may think "oh but as soon as you add any kind of complicated code, there will probably be so much boilerplate with Nue that it'll end up being bigger"..
  - muspimerol 2y ago
    This comparison is disingenuous and off-putting. When I read "a React button" I assume you are talking about `<button>` and the React runtime, not some third party libraries.
JodieBenitez 2y ago
At this point I don't even understand why everything has to be a SPA. It's complicated and inefficient and should probably be only used with highly interactive applications like some kind of Photoshop or Ableton live for the web, which means very few apps should use this paradigm. Granted, I'm not much of a frontend dev... but what I know is that if "instant search and other operations over 150,000 records" is a problem then it's probably best to re-think the paradigm.
- n2d4 2y ago
  SPAs are great for the hordes of B2B SaaS apps out there, which for the most part are just some fancy variants of a table. They're not a Photoshop, but they're still highly interactive.
  - jack_riminton 2y ago
    I think the exact opposite is true, B2B SaaS apps don't need to be an SPA to deal with fancy variants of a table. You can create highly interactive UI with things like Rails and Hotwire, sprinkles of JS or even HTMX. SPA's are bloat and often driven by designers who focus on flashiness rather than good UX.
    - n2d4 2y ago
      Even if you use Rails or HTMX to get it done, you're still building an SPA.
      - jack_riminton 2y ago
        Couldn’t be more wrong
- tipiirai 2y ago
  If you look at the documentation at nuejs.org/docs, you'll see how Nue is really more about apps that focus on content rather than single-page apps (SPAs). However, this release is all about SPAs.
Cthulhu_ 2y ago
I don't think the "a button in X is 40% heavier than an SPA" is a fair comparison; including a framework will add weight, but these frameworks are not intended for single components. Compare apples to apples, then we can make a fair comparison. That said, how does Nue compare to htmx and other frameworks leveraging the modern web standards?
- tipiirai 2y ago
  Is there a full-blown SPA demo made with htmx?
- t-writescode 2y ago
  - htmx = 14k as min.gz - solidjs = 7kb as min.gz htmx for "easy" html, solid for reactivity. Don't know how much more Nue provides; but, there you go for numbers.
- MartijnHols 2y ago
  There is no such things as a true apples to apples comparison for libraries such as this. They all cherry pick something and ignore a ton of things such as: - accessibility - amount of libraries with plug-and-play solutions to common problems - security - scalability - rendering performance - maintainability - browser support - browser extension interference - hundreds of other niche edge-cases that someone will eventually run into but are non-obvious until it's widely used React is really well-thought out and well made by hundreds of professional contributors that have worked on it for years. The premise that hobbyists can make a better overall solution in less than 8 months is strange. At best they can make a smaller solution, but it will have to sacrifice in other areas.
  - maccard 2y ago
    React and the react ecosystem fail at many of the criteria you’ve listed. You might argue “that’s not reacts fault” but when I look at a website that takes 15+ seconds to load its content on a gigabit connection , I’m never surprised when it’s react. Lots of sites have massive issues with rendering performance, scalability and maintainability even with react. What react does do is give you a clean separation of concerns across team boundaries and allow for reusable components . But the cost you pay for that is a boat load of overhead, complexity, maintainability concerns, and react specific edge cases
arewethereyeta 2y ago
flawed example for a framework. Tell me...are 2 buttons going to be 80% heavier? why use react if all you build is a button? you need a tractor to pick your groceries from store?
klysm 2y ago
Incredible marketing blurb! Not a single bit of detail about how this works
pier25 2y ago
Nue is a very cool project but if you want people to take the project seriously you should probably tone down your confrontational marketing :) Also, I checked the demo and there's like 100kB of WASM code you're not taking into consideration in that React button comparison? Anyway, congrats on the project. I'm really curious to see how the whole vision will turn out.
- kigiri 2y ago
  100% agree, I felt very put off by the tone, I think HTMX pull it off by not taking itself too seriously and also having good insights. I wish the homepage talked more about how nue approach the problems rather than how better than other framework it is.
- tipiirai 2y ago
  I think you're right on the marketing. I'll tone down. The comparison uses the non-wasm version at mpa.nuejs.org
  - azemetre 2y ago
    If you want an alternative view, I like the confrontational tone. You know what you excel at and attack your competitors with it. I really dislike how all the other JS UI libraries are basically the same and espouse the same ideas. Svelte was way better when Rich Harris was straight up attacking react devs at conferences and shaming them for poor performance. Being "nice" just ensures entrenched players stay entrenched.
    - pier25 2y ago
      I wrote "tone down" not "completely remove" ;) Rich and HTMX have a much different tone while shaming React.
  - dmix 2y ago
    If you're actually doing something better and your results actually stack up under scrutiny I don't see the problem. I think most people get uncomfortable because it's often untrue in marketing. So if it's true (to the best of your knowledge and after outside probing) then by all means.
joquarky 2y ago
I resonate with what you're saying so I'm mostly just curious how long you've been developing front end code. I think those who have had had to run the gauntlet of naked JS in the 90s developed the discipline to intuitively code untyped. I've been enjoying JS since it was first added to Netscape and I also loathe the creeping bloat that is endemic to web development these days. In the event that I want an "intellisense" dropdown capability in a project, I'm a big fan of JSDoc. I think the bootcamp kiddies these days just don't have enough experience to get by without the intellisense crutch.

whatever1 2y ago

How is Vite relevant to the discussion? It's like saying the UI based on Visual Studio is lighter.

tipiirai 2y ago
Because Vite emphasizes "Optimized build" in their marketing
- notpushkin 2y ago
  Slower builds might make developers more thoughtful of the bloat, but I still think it’s tangential. That said, how does Nue compare to, say, Svelte?
- isqueiros 2y ago
  I'm not sure if I got this correctly, but it seems like you're misunderstanding what Vite actually is or does. For having built what is essentially a bundler, I would've guessed you were more familiar with what it does, or, perhaps even have used it to build your tool. Vite can bundle framework-less html files. It can create an SPA without any JS faff. You just have to point it to the right direction. When you instantiate a Vite app, you have to make the conscious decision to use React under the hood. As for Nue, I think it's a cool idea, but I don't see what it does that I couldn't do with Astro, which has way larger community support and can work with pretty much all JS frameworks OOB. BTW, I think it's really disingenuous to compare a React SPA bundle with an SSG output. You have essentially no functionality for handling state mutations beside events. You could achieve a much better middle ground by using a compiled framework like Svelte or Solid.
mrcsharp 2y ago
I'd argue that UIs built in Visual Studio are a lot more performant and lightweight than Electron apps.

n2d4 2y ago

What do you mean by "lighter than a React button"? Do you mean lighter than the entire React runtime, plus a React button? If so, that's somewhat disingenuous because even though a page with a single button would require the entire runtime, a second React button would be significantly cheaper than that.

tipiirai 2y ago
Yes. React runtime included. Benchmark and details here: https://nuejs.org/docs/react-button-vs-nue.html https://nuejs.org/docs/react-button-vs-nue.html
- Fulgen 2y ago
  As the previous commenter said - you don't need a new runtime instance per button, so the comparison doesn't really work (for the smallest binary size, you could provide a native application doing the bare minimum to display the UI too, if the platform has an OS-provided UI framework). It's still a neat toolkit, since not every website needs a big framework - but comparing runtime sizes is like choosing C over C++ because a `int main() { printf("Hello World\n"); }` binary is smaller.
  - audunw 2y ago
    I think it's relevant in the sense that it shows if you're building a simple app, there's a lot of overhead. It doesn't claim that you're going to get that overhead for every time you instance a button. I don't see how anyone would think that. I think the comparison works fairly well. It should be clear to everyone that it compares apples and oranges, since it's two different kind of apps it's comparing. So it makes you think. If they just compared the size of the framework itself, or a single button vs a single button, you may think "oh but as soon as you add any kind of complicated code, there will probably be so much boilerplate with Nue that it'll end up being bigger"..
- muspimerol 2y ago
  This comparison is disingenuous and off-putting. When I read "a React button" I assume you are talking about `<button>` and the React runtime, not some third party libraries.

JodieBenitez 2y ago

At this point I don't even understand why everything has to be a SPA. It's complicated and inefficient and should probably be only used with highly interactive applications like some kind of Photoshop or Ableton live for the web, which means very few apps should use this paradigm. Granted, I'm not much of a frontend dev... but what I know is that if "instant search and other operations over 150,000 records" is a problem then it's probably best to re-think the paradigm.

n2d4 2y ago
SPAs are great for the hordes of B2B SaaS apps out there, which for the most part are just some fancy variants of a table. They're not a Photoshop, but they're still highly interactive.
- jack_riminton 2y ago
  I think the exact opposite is true, B2B SaaS apps don't need to be an SPA to deal with fancy variants of a table. You can create highly interactive UI with things like Rails and Hotwire, sprinkles of JS or even HTMX. SPA's are bloat and often driven by designers who focus on flashiness rather than good UX.
  - n2d4 2y ago
    Even if you use Rails or HTMX to get it done, you're still building an SPA.
    - jack_riminton 2y ago
      Couldn’t be more wrong
tipiirai 2y ago
If you look at the documentation at nuejs.org/docs, you'll see how Nue is really more about apps that focus on content rather than single-page apps (SPAs). However, this release is all about SPAs.

Cthulhu_ 2y ago

I don't think the "a button in X is 40% heavier than an SPA" is a fair comparison; including a framework will add weight, but these frameworks are not intended for single components. Compare apples to apples, then we can make a fair comparison. That said, how does Nue compare to htmx and other frameworks leveraging the modern web standards?

tipiirai 2y ago
Is there a full-blown SPA demo made with htmx?
t-writescode 2y ago
- htmx = 14k as min.gz - solidjs = 7kb as min.gz htmx for "easy" html, solid for reactivity. Don't know how much more Nue provides; but, there you go for numbers.
MartijnHols 2y ago
There is no such things as a true apples to apples comparison for libraries such as this. They all cherry pick something and ignore a ton of things such as: - accessibility - amount of libraries with plug-and-play solutions to common problems - security - scalability - rendering performance - maintainability - browser support - browser extension interference - hundreds of other niche edge-cases that someone will eventually run into but are non-obvious until it's widely used React is really well-thought out and well made by hundreds of professional contributors that have worked on it for years. The premise that hobbyists can make a better overall solution in less than 8 months is strange. At best they can make a smaller solution, but it will have to sacrifice in other areas.
- maccard 2y ago
  React and the react ecosystem fail at many of the criteria you’ve listed. You might argue “that’s not reacts fault” but when I look at a website that takes 15+ seconds to load its content on a gigabit connection , I’m never surprised when it’s react. Lots of sites have massive issues with rendering performance, scalability and maintainability even with react. What react does do is give you a clean separation of concerns across team boundaries and allow for reusable components . But the cost you pay for that is a boat load of overhead, complexity, maintainability concerns, and react specific edge cases

arewethereyeta 2y ago

flawed example for a framework. Tell me...are 2 buttons going to be 80% heavier? why use react if all you build is a button? you need a tractor to pick your groceries from store?

klysm 2y ago

Incredible marketing blurb! Not a single bit of detail about how this works

pier25 2y ago

Nue is a very cool project but if you want people to take the project seriously you should probably tone down your confrontational marketing :) Also, I checked the demo and there's like 100kB of WASM code you're not taking into consideration in that React button comparison? Anyway, congrats on the project. I'm really curious to see how the whole vision will turn out.

kigiri 2y ago
100% agree, I felt very put off by the tone, I think HTMX pull it off by not taking itself too seriously and also having good insights. I wish the homepage talked more about how nue approach the problems rather than how better than other framework it is.
tipiirai 2y ago
I think you're right on the marketing. I'll tone down. The comparison uses the non-wasm version at mpa.nuejs.org
- azemetre 2y ago
  If you want an alternative view, I like the confrontational tone. You know what you excel at and attack your competitors with it. I really dislike how all the other JS UI libraries are basically the same and espouse the same ideas. Svelte was way better when Rich Harris was straight up attacking react devs at conferences and shaming them for poor performance. Being "nice" just ensures entrenched players stay entrenched.
  - pier25 2y ago
    I wrote "tone down" not "completely remove" ;) Rich and HTMX have a much different tone while shaming React.
- dmix 2y ago
  If you're actually doing something better and your results actually stack up under scrutiny I don't see the problem. I think most people get uncomfortable because it's often untrue in marketing. So if it's true (to the best of your knowledge and after outside probing) then by all means.

joquarky 2y ago

I resonate with what you're saying so I'm mostly just curious how long you've been developing front end code. I think those who have had had to run the gauntlet of naked JS in the 90s developed the discipline to intuitively code untyped. I've been enjoying JS since it was first added to Netscape and I also loathe the creeping bloat that is endemic to web development these days. In the event that I want an "intellisense" dropdown capability in a project, I'm a big fan of JSDoc. I think the bootcamp kiddies these days just don't have enough experience to get by without the intellisense crutch.