Comment by pigbearpig

7 hours ago

Respectfully, I don't understand this. They never needed Next.js for a static blog.

This is like writing a post about how I didn't need a Ferrari to commute to work and I saved money by taking the bus.

Next.js supports fully static export, so they should have went with that.

I run a dynamic website on nextjs static export - landingpages and docs are fully static, login and user dashboard use REST calls to a non-nextjs backend. Blazing fast, no nodejs or SSR in production.

  • Next.js supports fully static export, so they should went with that.

    Keeping an unnecessary dependency for legacy reasons is never a good move. Be bold and delete things. Your software will be better for it.

    • Wouldn't say unnecesarry. Nextjs static export has features such as dynamic chunking, eager-loading of chunks when you hover over a link, routing etc. With a plugin you get image optimization (different image quality levels and dimensions based on viewport size) etc.

      But yes, another static site blog generator would also work.

      2 replies →

Next.js is not a good fit for most applications. It honestly never has been. It has just been Vercel's relentless over-the-top marketing that has been trying to convince junior developers that it is.

I think we should blame the elders for teaching people new to the trade wrong.

Because "heavyweight SPA for a static blog" isn't exactly a rare problem.

  • My super large SPA loads in 150ms on localhost. Yes, if it were just a static blog I might get it down to about 60ms.

    The problem isn’t the size of the code. It’s the unnecessary framework complexity. Suggesting this to a corporate JavaScript developer, though, is like throwing acid on your own face as they whine about how impossible it is to do their jobs.

  • It wasn't the elders, it was Vercel itself which has a vested interest

It's more like they realised they can also commute by bike or foot never realizing before that that was even an option