Comment by herrkanin
5 days ago
The difficulty to deploy Next.js is greatly exaggerated in my opinion. It's mostly if you care about some of the more advanced features, like image optimization and hosting static assets on a different origin it can become difficult, but these are features no Next.js alternative generally provide anyway.
> hosting static assets on a different origin it can become difficult
What's the alternative? Hosting the static assets on the same place as the backend? Usually adding the CORS headers is enough to solve that (on the backend side), the frontend is still just HTML,CSS and JS running from nginx.
Is it common to do a different type of deployment with Next.js? It's a pretty basic deployment scenario (having the frontend on a different origin than the backend it communicates with), so not sure why that'd be so difficult with Next.js compared to basically anything else.
It's the opposite, it's extremely easy to do that with Next.js - pretty much free - but only if you're deploying to Vercel. If you want to host somewhere else then you have to do that semi-manually the same way you would with any other framework.
Same. I've deployed a half dozen or so Next.js apps and it's no more difficult than any other node app unless you're using some of the more advanced features. In fact, if you only need something static and can do SSG then it's far easier than other node apps because all you need is nginx.
Even with the optimizations it's not that difficult in my experience. Not terribly well documented (not worst-in-class either) but not that hard and mostly just works once you have a pipeline up and running. We set ours up about two years ago now and have had to make minor modifications maybe three times since then.