Content
@
0 reply
0 recast
2 reactions
Steve
@stevedylandev.eth
Something I would add to the Next conversation: it’s ok to use Next. Personally Next has allowed me to ship ideas fast. Over the last year I’ve shipped around fully 10+ fully functional marketing apps for Pinata on Next, including @candyroad, @photocast, and Snippets.so. That doesn’t include the frames, which would be in the dozens. These are apps that if we had to scale them into full products, it wouldn’t be that hard to move to a more robust full stack. The key is I didn’t over analyze and build with the goal of supporting 10k users. I built with the purpose testing an idea and providing an example. Depending on your position you may value optimizing for growth more, but I think generally it’s agreed to ship fast first. There’s no point in wasting time on an idea that might suck. If you genuinely don’t like DX that’s fine too. Build with the framework that makes you excited to code. Whatever the case may be, just ship it.
4 replies
3 recasts
28 reactions
Harry
@htormey
For me, it’s not just about cost. NextJS feels increasingly janky—backwards compatibility is slipping, and the complexity/utility of features doesn’t add up. I’m also concerned about its long-term viability. Learning NextJS doesn’t feel like the same solid investment as React or Postgres.
1 reply
1 recast
4 reactions
Steve
@stevedylandev.eth
That’s totally valid, although again for most ideas/apps that might fade into memory it probably isn’t that consequential. But again if learning it doesn’t click then another stack might be a better to invest in. React is solid since so many other frameworks are built around it.
1 reply
0 recast
2 reactions
