Eric W. Bailey writes about web accessibility, the harm of bloated frameworks and poor performance, and problems in how teams build software.
HN commenters cite it as a counterpoint to putting developer experience over user experience, arguing performance matters to people who depend on software.
I agree with the article, but think it's poorly written. In a way, it's a bit like the developer work that its criticizing -- overly complex.
One of the linked articles is much better and to the point: https://ericwbailey.website/published/modern-health-frameworks-performance-and-harm/
My 2c: I've seen good experiences, but a lot more poor ones. I've worked on them and they were n times more expensive for very little benefit. I don't think it's by design, but more cynical people might. I think it's just a dogma among developers and management too afraid to step in because developers hold too much power. They want to work on this because everyone else is, and if they can't they will go somewhere else and then you need to find new developers and everyone knows there aren't any available.
We switched to a server side rendered spa stack because the developers said "don't want to be stuck on old fashioned stacks, want to work on cool things". We then needed twice the time and twice the developers to get things done.
So basically the way out of this is for someone to hype up a server side solution and sell it as a shiny new thing. It needs to be logical in a way that makes lights in heads go on, but also somewhat mysterious and new. Deno Islands fit that mold, we'll see if it pans out.
I think it does matter. Bad software can make peoples lives worse, especially when they depend on it. Really bad software can kill people. Maybe it doesn't matter to the bottom line of a business, but that's a particularly low bar to meet.
Take this article for example
https://ericwbailey.website/published/modern-health-frameworks-performance-and-harm/
Someone in a genuine health crisis seeking help but can't receive it could have deadly consequences. It doesn't matter to the business, but it does matter to people. Life is messy and complex, and if our software doesn't work correctly it does add to the suffering of others. Maybe it pushes some people past the point of no return. There are consequences to what we do, good or bad.
This is what I fear most about the rise of vibe coding. Businesses profit, people get hurt, and the incentives are all wrong.
Nice DX at the cost of UX.
The current state of web development has been ruined by putting developer experience over user experience. A great example that was shared on HN a few days ago: https://ericwbailey.website/published/modern-health-frameworks-performance-and-harm/
This person couldn't use the site. But at least the developer got to see red squiggles when they didn't format their object properly!
If you see "not using JS as much" as knee-capping your hiring, then you are putting your personal preferences ahead of what is good for the users.
Counterpoint: https://ericwbailey.website/published/modern-health-frameworks-performance-and-harm/
Performance does matter to the people who depend on our products. Can we please stop throwing people under the bus in the name of churning out more crap?