Hacker News Reader

Comment by thinkingkong | Hacker News Reader

It's hard to take Vercel at face value these days with all of these improvements and announcements. Are we supposed to - in hindsight - understand that odd version numbers of their codebase were really just unstable releases all along? The app server implementation wasn't really meant to be used because it was an experimental release?

I'm having a difficult time not being salty about this entire situation. There are basic production requirements that haven't been addressed for years because their hosting platform provides it. You don't like the way they do logging? Sounds like you need an attitude adjustment.

View on HN

I stopped paying attention when someone recently told me that everyone uses nextjs because “nextjs is meta right now”. Mind you this person has been a developer for about 3 years (not that there’s anything wrong with that but it gives you an idea of whose buying into this stuff)

Vercels devrel is by far the best thing that they do, miles ahead of their engineering.

well to me part of the reason to identify "the meta" is not to go along with it, but so you can develop tactics to counter it -- but maybe not everyone thinks that way

Really though, it's not true that "everyone is using nextjs", so it's not "the meta" anyhow. I think most developers can safely ignore it

I think anyone who says everyone uses X now exists in some kind of bubble when it comes to technology.

I don't want to counter their point just for the sake of countering it but if a person's only supporting argument for using a tool is "everyone uses it" there isn't much of an argument to be had in the first place.

So you stopped using a product because a junior engineer liked it? That doesn't strike me as the best rationale to make a decision.

So you start using a product just because other people tell you they are popular? That doesn't strike me as the best rationale to make a decision.

That's not the argument being made. Nobody said that.

Just like I never made the argument claimed either.

What did you mean by "I stopped paying attention" then? Was that a metaphor? It looks like you made the argument I claimed quite clearly.

Stopped paying attention to the hype? I never claimed to use next.js. How did I make that claim quite clearly exactly?

Notice how you subconsciously called Next a product.

What's wrong with that? I have no illusions that Next.js is part of a larger strategy to get me to pay money for services. I feel the same way about VSCode and Azure, or Github and Copilot, etc. I don't have any problem with paying money for products that deserve it.

How is it not a product? It is produced and used. Many types of software are also products, whether they're VC funded or not.

I am not arguing that it is not. I very much agree Next is a product because it very much fits its definition: "an article or substance that is manufactured or refined for sale.".

But this is wrong by definition: "Many types of software are also products, whether they're VC funded or not."

That's funny. What does that even mean, "Meta?" You can game it for points or something?

I read the release notes but don’t understand what you’re talking about re: app router. They mentioned that they’re still supporting app router and pages router.

Correct, the Pages Router is very much still supported with new improvements being made. The performance improvements in this post apply there. The same APIs and features included in Next.js 1.0 still work today with the Pages Router.

Please take this seriously: stop advising in github issues to switch to App router as a solution to bugs in page router.

It's not an option for large next.js projects, and certainly does not convey what you're saying here.

Can you be more specific on the issue? It’s possible there’s a reason why App Router was recommended in this case.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com