Re: Why SPAs are usually a waste of time/money

You raise some valid questions to consider. But imo the credibility of the
articles suffers because, as others have pointed out, you’re seriously
overstating your case.

Thanks for posting this!

On Tue, Oct 30, 2018 at 11:37 AM Andy Jones <[email protected]>
wrote:

> My 10p:
>
>
>
> I can see that if you have separate, skilled front-end developers then
> SPA’s make sense as a way of splitting up the work.  But from the
> development side, you’ve significantly added to the list of skills your
> programmers need and the list of technologies that you depend upon.
>
>
>
> From the user point of view, an SPA adds a lot to a site’s footprint.
> Most React sites behave poorly on my phone when I’m away from home!
>
>
>
> Looking good is not everything.  Maybe websites should look like websites,
> not apps.  But yes, there will be times when writing all of your user
> interface in Elm or React makes sense.
>
>
>
> *From:* ruby-talk [mailto:[email protected]] *On Behalf Of *Greg
> Navis
> *Sent:* 30 October 2018 13:53
> *To:* Ruby users
> *Subject:* Why SPAs are usually a waste of time/money
>
>
>
> Hey!
>
>
>
> I'd like to share an article with you why SPAs are a bad architectural
> choice from a business perspective 99% of the time.
>
>
>
> https://www.gregnavis.com/articles/the-architecture-no-one-needs.html
>
>
>
> Thoughts?
>
>
>
> Best regards
>
> Greg Navis
>
>
> Click here to view Company Information and Confidentiality Notice.
> <http://www.jameshall.co.uk/index.php/small-print/email-disclaimer>
>
> Please note that we have updated our privacy policy in line with new data
> protection regulations. Please refer to our website to view the ways in
> which we handle your data.
>
> Unsubscribe: <mailto:[email protected]?subject=unsubscribe>
> <http://lists.ruby-lang.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/ruby-talk>
>
-- 
Sent from Gmail Mobile


Unsubscribe: <mailto:[email protected]?subject=unsubscribe>
<http://lists.ruby-lang.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/ruby-talk>