<story><title>React is the new jQuery</title><url>http://bradfrost.com/blog/link/replacing-jquery-with-vue-js-no-build-step-necessary/</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>jimmaswell</author><text>Being used to jQuery, I really see no reason not to use it in new projects. I could learn all the new native equivalents, and even then still ending up doing more work than if I&amp;#x27;d been using jQuery, just to save a little bit of page load time and filesize, but it would almost certainly not be worth it.</text></item><item><author>danShumway</author><text>I don&amp;#x27;t think JQuery ever got bad. It just got unnecessary, like you said. But it took a lot of work to convince people that it was unnecessary.&lt;p&gt;A charitable explanation of Sara&amp;#x27;s tweet might be that, like with jQuery, it is becoming difficult to convince new developers that React may not be necessary for their next project.&lt;p&gt;The other comparative downside of JQuery was that components started to rely on it as a shared library, which meant developers suddenly needed to do dependency management. That is (usually) a bad idea. React absolutely does have that problem as well - probably to an even worse degree than jQuery widgets ever did.&lt;p&gt;This is kind of the same concern I have with Vue to be honest. I use Vue for prototyping and will probably use it in some final apps as well. But I&amp;#x27;m probably not ever going to use a component that someone else has written if it relies on Vue.&lt;p&gt;IMO Lodash went the right direction with this. A component or library can depend on Lodash, pull in &lt;i&gt;just&lt;/i&gt; the functions that they use for a final build, and then nobody else in the entire dev toolchain needs to know or care. No risk of conflicting dependencies, build size stays low, etc...&lt;p&gt;I kind of wonder if the problems Vue solves for me could be solved better by a smaller, lodash-style library instead of a framework.</text></item><item><author>superfrank</author><text>&amp;gt; React is the new jQuery&lt;p&gt;Anyone who uses &amp;quot;the new jQuery&amp;quot; as some sort of insult (as it seems Sara did in her tweet) probably hasn&amp;#x27;t been a developer for more than a few years or is just trying to sound smarter than they are by bashing an easy target.&lt;p&gt;The reason jQuery got so popular is that it made common tasks so much easier than anything else at the time. Anyone who was doing web development before jQuery knows what a godsend it was at the time. JQuery was a fantastic leap forward for development at the time it was released.&lt;p&gt;JQuery didn&amp;#x27;t become bad, the rest of the development world caught up and made it unnecessary.</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>isostatic</author><text>Indeed. I occasionally write a webbased tool to deal with a specific task (say formatting some form of codec data, or a simple dashboard for a specific event, or a small config generator, or whatever), userbase is in the &amp;lt;10 users (not concurrent) range, I don&amp;#x27;t give a stuff about scaling. I care that the code is in a repo (git, svn, whatever), is versioned (deb, rpm, whatever), and deploys cleanly.&lt;p&gt;I could learn and use $latest_thing, and maybe it would be great. That will triple the time taken to develop, but whatever. However in a couple of years time when I come to need to write something else, $latest_thing will be old hat, and replaced by $shiny_and_new. Rather than having 10 years of nice simple code based on jquery, I get some based on Angular, some on React, some on Vue, some on Meteor, or whatever.&lt;p&gt;I&amp;#x27;m not a programmer, I&amp;#x27;m not a wireman, and I&amp;#x27;m not a carpenter. I program in the same way I&amp;#x27;ll run a network cable or get a screwdriver out, it&amp;#x27;s a tool I can use to solve a specific task. I like tools that are the same, year in, year out.&lt;p&gt;That&amp;#x27;s not to say the latest frameworks aren&amp;#x27;t all great, if you&amp;#x27;re building something for a million users and want to take advantage of shiny new features that&amp;#x27;s great, but for those that aren&amp;#x27;t, there&amp;#x27;s still a place for boring old things in a large part of the computer industry.</text></comment>
<story><title>React is the new jQuery</title><url>http://bradfrost.com/blog/link/replacing-jquery-with-vue-js-no-build-step-necessary/</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>jimmaswell</author><text>Being used to jQuery, I really see no reason not to use it in new projects. I could learn all the new native equivalents, and even then still ending up doing more work than if I&amp;#x27;d been using jQuery, just to save a little bit of page load time and filesize, but it would almost certainly not be worth it.</text></item><item><author>danShumway</author><text>I don&amp;#x27;t think JQuery ever got bad. It just got unnecessary, like you said. But it took a lot of work to convince people that it was unnecessary.&lt;p&gt;A charitable explanation of Sara&amp;#x27;s tweet might be that, like with jQuery, it is becoming difficult to convince new developers that React may not be necessary for their next project.&lt;p&gt;The other comparative downside of JQuery was that components started to rely on it as a shared library, which meant developers suddenly needed to do dependency management. That is (usually) a bad idea. React absolutely does have that problem as well - probably to an even worse degree than jQuery widgets ever did.&lt;p&gt;This is kind of the same concern I have with Vue to be honest. I use Vue for prototyping and will probably use it in some final apps as well. But I&amp;#x27;m probably not ever going to use a component that someone else has written if it relies on Vue.&lt;p&gt;IMO Lodash went the right direction with this. A component or library can depend on Lodash, pull in &lt;i&gt;just&lt;/i&gt; the functions that they use for a final build, and then nobody else in the entire dev toolchain needs to know or care. No risk of conflicting dependencies, build size stays low, etc...&lt;p&gt;I kind of wonder if the problems Vue solves for me could be solved better by a smaller, lodash-style library instead of a framework.</text></item><item><author>superfrank</author><text>&amp;gt; React is the new jQuery&lt;p&gt;Anyone who uses &amp;quot;the new jQuery&amp;quot; as some sort of insult (as it seems Sara did in her tweet) probably hasn&amp;#x27;t been a developer for more than a few years or is just trying to sound smarter than they are by bashing an easy target.&lt;p&gt;The reason jQuery got so popular is that it made common tasks so much easier than anything else at the time. Anyone who was doing web development before jQuery knows what a godsend it was at the time. JQuery was a fantastic leap forward for development at the time it was released.&lt;p&gt;JQuery didn&amp;#x27;t become bad, the rest of the development world caught up and made it unnecessary.</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>3131s</author><text>It irks me that Javascript didn&amp;#x27;t just adopt the best parts of JQuery.</text></comment>