[MartijnHols]

There is no such things as a true apples to apples comparison for libraries such as this. They all cherry pick something and ignore a ton of things such as:

  - accessibility
  - amount of libraries with plug-and-play solutions to common problems
  - security
  - scalability
  - rendering performance
  - maintainability
  - browser support
  - browser extension interference
  - hundreds of other niche edge-cases that someone will eventually run into but are non-obvious until it's widely used

React is really well-thought out and well made by hundreds of professional contributors that have worked on it for years. The premise that hobbyists can make a better overall solution in less than 8 months is strange. At best they can make a smaller solution, but it will have to sacrifice in other areas.

[maccard]

React and the react ecosystem fail at many of the criteria you’ve listed. You might argue “that’s not reacts fault” but when I look at a website that takes 15+ seconds to load its content on a gigabit connection , I’m never surprised when it’s react. Lots of sites have massive issues with rendering performance, scalability and maintainability even with react.

What react does do is give you a clean separation of concerns across team boundaries and allow for reusable components . But the cost you pay for that is a boat load of overhead, complexity, maintainability concerns, and react specific edge cases

[MartijnHols]

A 15+ second load on a gigabit connection is impossible to have anything to do with the React library, as React is only kilobytes big and has no impact on the host.

[joquarky]

I think companies should make web developers use a decade-old bargain-basement laptop at least once a month.

Each team member could take their turn using it so that it's already tooled up for the project they are working on.