Hacker News Reader

Comment by pier25 | Hacker News Reader

According to Ryan Florence (Remix's creator) they are "ripping features straight from Remix".

https://twitter.com/ryanflorence/status/1528859776930545665

Which is a bit silly, to be honest. I understand wanting to see some credit given, and it wouldn't have cost Vercel anything to do so, but this is hardly "new Remix technology" that they're copying (also the condescending "React czar" stuff is just super inappropriate, but par for the course with the way the Remix team has been talking about Remix on Twitter since the days when they were boasting about not taking VC money).

The fundamental approach Remix (and now Vercel) takes to nested routing with React SSR is fairly straightforward. It's how everyone else (not using a framework) has been doing nested routing with React SSR for, what, at least 5 years? Granted, most of us have been using React Router for our React SSR setups, and credit very deservingly goes to the React Router guys (who are now the Remix guys) for that. Remix did a great job of delivering a framework that (via a nice compiler and file structure conventions) makes this React SSR routing architecture very easy to use! But that doesn't mean that anyone else who takes this same fundamental approach is somehow copying Remix. The home-grown React SSR setup I've worked on for the last 4+ years has been doing the same thing this whole time, and while we might be "copying what the React Router community was doing 4-5 years ago," and that might even include demos or articles written by someone who went on to found or work at Remix (again, really, thanks!), I don't think we're in any sense "copying Remix."

edit: Well, I just noticed on Twitter than the cofounder of Remix (also co-creator of React Router) is, contrary to the opinion I expressed in the paragraph above, clearly claiming that he believes Remix deserves attribution for any usage of concepts which ever existed previously in React Router. I don't agree with this. https://twitter.com/ryanflorence/status/1528862791490105344

I don’t understand why you’d ever expect your competitors not to copy your good ideas. That’s business sense 101 as far as I’m concerned.

Remix creators inspired by Ember.js as they mentioned years ago in one of the blogpost about the new concept and philosophy.

https://mobile.twitter.com/sebmarkbage/status/15288585107544...

> No shame in copying but the first prototype of this started before Remix was available. It was more inspired by traditional server routing techniques (like FB used) with React Router locality with Next.js file conventions. So it's more about convergent evolution in this case.

It’s an odd claim, because people have been asking for this (nested routes) more-or-less since Next was first released. In fact, Remix is basically a compiler for the patterns we could achieve back in the days of React Router 2 and 3 (2015-2017).

The fact that the APIs looks similar seems largely inevitable based on the fact that everyone seems to be converging around defining routes using folder and file name conventions.

It reminds me of patent trolls who patent obvious software designs. I was looking for such feature long before I heard of Remix. I know he's the react-router guy, but nested views isn't exactly some novel idea - sites have been using it forever.

> Remix is basically a compiler for the patterns we could achieve back in the days of React Router 2 and 3

Well, Remix and react-router are by the same people.

I definitely understand the reaction. This is an existential threat to Remix.

However, this is why I don't use Twitter. Remix is not just "an open-source project", it's a full-fledged company. This is definitely not the time (or the forum) to lay your cards out on the table...

It's a full fledged company and somehow Ryan Florence and the other guy are quite heavy handed in pushing their business which irks me. Even react router was moved to a business org called react training if I remember so that they could sell their courses. Now there is nothing wrong with earning money but this new wave of "open source" businesses is a bit yucky.

theres a lot of cognitive dissonance in monetization of open source by consumers of the product.

If you can't charge money for the software, selling courses is the next best thing. Why is it yucky?

It's not the training, it's the fact that they moved the project repo under the React Training organization, and now it's under Remix... Just comes off as a cheap attempt at marketing while ruining the OSS image of the project.

You can make convoluted software which creates an artificial need for your training or consulting service.

Also using OSS as a funnel for your business and then use your training to hype up your OSS projects

We've deviated from the OP, but I wanted to mention that this is why react-table and react-query bother me endlessly.

So we need to give credit now to every little bit of inspiration we get when coming up with new features and ideas?

Not really sure what the problem is here.

You'd have to ask Ryan :)

IMO it's really just a matter of time before good ideas end up in other projects. It's inevitable. Obviously everyone wants their framework to be as good and popular as possible.

It's really not an especially novel idea either- there's not really a good reason for remix itself to be getting the credit here.

Ryan and his insufferable Remix evangelists are the reason I never went beyond a quick hello world. And I like the concept.

A while ago he had a Twitter series “spot a React app” where he just shits on other peoples work.

Such an odd way to promote his work.

And this weird obsession with form methods and the way they make it like if you dont use form method you are an idiot.

Like get on with it, are there are other things in remix? I'd like to hear about them too!

> insufferable Remix evangelists

That is so true. It's been driving me insane since Remix was announced/opened but I couldn't quite put my finger on why. It's because overnight there was an army of people preaching the new religion of Remix all over the place, and not a single one I asked could (at the time at least) tell me why it was better/different than Next.js (a project which IMHO rose on its merit and had to fight for every inch). They had clearly never looked seriously at Next.js before because every "feature" of Remix they were excited about was something Next.js already did. After a bit they started linking to a very long blog post from the Remix creator that supposedly explained why they were different, but after 10 minutes of looking through a post that was supposed to answer my question, all I had was anecdotal performance numbers about how Remix is "faster."

In software we definitely do tend to cargo cult and worship good languages/frameworks, but the Remix "love" is (or was at least) over the top even for us.

Yeah this is really common in people trying out niche things.

Not only in software. Remember the "Don't worry, they'll tell you" jokes about vegans and crossfit?

I think it must be some sort of evolutionary strategy to justify the risk/anxiety of going against the group.

Credit's been added: https://twitter.com/leeerob/status/1528887380681588736

It's weird to me: I don't use Twitter and I don't intentionally follow influencers or celebrities in the tech world. Yet somehow RF has been the center of several bouts of developer of drama I've come across. Any idea why that might be?

And remix is ripping features from Vercel. Such as they business model, and the idea of creating their own framework for it.

Additionally, I wouldn't trust ever again the guys that rewrote and broke react-router with incompatible changes like... 6 times already? And now bragging on podcasts "Remix is 10 years old because is just built on top of react-router". Bullshit, it's just the npm package name that is this old. It is so deceptive all the ugly marketing they're doing.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com