Web dev is still fun if you want it to be

[jacques_chester]

I wrote a silly toy website and went out of my way to enjoy it, rather than endure it.

I wrote up my thoughts. Maybe they'll resonate with you. Maybe they'll infuriate you. As long as they make you feel something more than a cosmic shrug I'll be pleased.

[simonw]

If you've found web development frustrating over the past 5-10 years, here's something that worked great for me: give yourself permission to avoid any form of frontend build system (so no npm/React/TypeScript/JSX/Babel/etc) and code in HTML and JavaScript like it's 2009.

The joy came flooding back to me! It turns out browser APIs are really good now.

You don't even need jQuery to paper over the gaps any more - use document.querySelectorAll() and fetch() directly and see how much value you can build with a few dozen lines of code.

[icameron]

I absolutely completely agree and do this myself. Unfortunately all of my peers and bosses don’t see the value, and the shop is overrun with trend chasing resume driven developers. React/node/next hosting on aws and containers and it will all be out of date next year. Everything we do has such low amount of users we don’t need anything but a single VPS and simple backend. Many of my apps from 10 years ago still run the same rails and jQuery just fine. Actually upgrading the rails versions and pulling out the jQuery dependencies is easy now too. It’s just so much simpler and works perfectly. But this is seen as detrimental to my career. It’s not appreciated. I sound like a dinosaur to the bosses and coworkers. But I enjoy it and my shit works fine. I’m saving so much time and hosting costs. Everything runs on a $40 VPS.

[AstroBen]

Often this works out to a better user experience too

Case in point: this site versus Reddit. HN is 100x snappier. Just a few lines of un-minified plain JS. Reddit crashes the browser on my iPad

[andrei_says_]

Also CSS! CSS grid, :has(), custom properties and improved browser compatibility. CSS is an amazingly powerful and beautiful language.

Embrace the cascade - check out ITCSS methodology.

Fluid typography and spacing - https://utopia.fyi

[perrygeo]

HTML and Javascript (the vanilla kind, written right into <script> tags like a caveman) is still one of best ways to experiment with UIs. It's not sustainable or maintainable but why do you need those qualities in demo software? I still maintain that a competent developer should be able to bang out an HTML/JS demo faster than they can draw the same complex flow in Figma.

[1dom]

I agree, modern browsers, CSS and JS can do so much now.

However, the frontend build systems are often complex to do complex state management. Sure, it's possible to reimplement it all and accidentally end up rewriting your own vanilla JS frontend framework, but beyond a point, that's equally as unfun as modern webdev.

It's not hard to shift the state management though, and when I find myself sat with a nice architecture that's formed without a complex frontend system, and with some really simple, uncluttered backend that could probably serve millions of requests a day from a homeserver and internet connection.... it gives me a profound feeling. It's a satisfying and familiar feeling from webdev I enjoyed around 2 decades ago as a teen. It feels like the old way of doing it.

Now, having designed, built and run systems from on-prem, through VPS & VMs onto serverless and static site stuff, doing it the old way again just feels better overall. Maybe it's nostalgia.

But then I feel the reason why we moved away from doing it the old way was because the complexity of the applications needed more efficient ways to make use of relatively limited bandwidth, storage and compute resources at the time. Now these things are all commoditised, and my home desktop and internet connection now has probably the same capabilities as a small datacentre back then... the dreamer in me wants to believe there's no reason why we can't all go back to the old ways of doing it now.

[midiguy]

Tbh, I would be pretty frustrated developing any non-trivial frontend code without a type system. But I am interested to try dropping frameworks.

[roywiggins]

Along those lines, I've found Alpine.js a very friendly framework to use for stuff benefits from one. It doesn't have a build system and works alongside vanilla JS or jQuery if you want it.

[sadcodemonkey]

Yes! I have to do front-end work occasionally but have been bad at staying on top of trends, so I would resort to jQuery if the requirements aren't super complex. Discovering querySelectorAll() and fetch() eliminated 75% of what I used jQuery for.

In the bad old days, there were a handful of canonical tutorials you used to learn the basics (HTML, CSS, JS) of web dev. Is there anything like that now that starts from those three technologies to build an understanding of web apps?

It seems like it could fill a real need for beginners who want to start by grasping the DNA of the web, so to speak, instead of the complex/sophisticated tools that are popular (not that there's anything wrong with that approach, if you need those skills for a job or project immediately).

[notyouraibot]

The hate towards modern front end tooling such as React/TS/JSX is nothing but a phase. 10 years ago engineers were hating and raging against PHP, but today they want to bring PHP back and make it a fundamental part of their tooling? They hated writing plain old CSS but now they want it back instead of Tailwind? None of this hate is actually based on any engineering value, sure you can build a little dumb todo app in plain old HTML, CSS and JS and it will work flawlessly, and if that's your goal you better stick to that, React, Next, Webpack, Vite and all these other tools aren't built for that purpose. Its nothing but nostalgia and elitism.

[princevegeta89]

Front-end is now a cesspool of numerous complex layers that try so hard to work with each other, all while only trying to deliver mostly the same kind of experience from 10 years ago or older.

Many big companies and startups blindly jump into the React/Vue/Angular stack, along with other complexities like Vite, Webpack, SSR, Zzzzzzzz... etc, where things are tied so loosely with 100s of dependencies and with a fragile underlying platform such as NPM. The output produced is only very marginally different from what could be achieved by the traditional MVC frameworks like Django/Rails/Phoenix etc. What do we lose here? a breathtaking amount of productivity and time. In addition, all the complex layers brought in place to make React FEs work with the backend such as GraphQL etc, also only increase the number of places you will have to maintain.

With SPA and all the modern snake oil like "serverless", engineers only will have to make changes at several places and implement some extra adapter logic, and spend a lot more time writing crap, than actually getting things out the door. With something as simple as JQuery which still holds its ground today, coupled with helper libraries like HTMX, Stimulus/Turbo, you can replicate 90% of the SPA experience, and ship things insanely fast, and maintain logic and state only on the backend. Your user only cares about seeing new features and existing features being easy to use. They don't give a fuck about whether you're using React or plain JavaScript or JQuery at the end of the day.

[conradfr]

Personally I'm pretty happy with Vite + Vue + Typescript (+ whatever for css).

I usually don't make a SPA though, only using it for specific parts (with their own entry file).

[strogonoff]

React does not require a build system. Just alias createElement() to e() and you get the exact same capabilities with a slightly more verbose syntax. I’ve done just that in the past to add small bits of interactivity to vanilla JS client side without modifying anything else.

It is a similar sort of confusion that comes from people thinking React is a Web framework. It’s actually a small library.

[bstsb]

opinionated, but i add tailwind to this. sometimes makes code less clean with no components but if you're insistent on reusability you can @apply

[exiguus]

I agree that allowing yourself to forgo learning another library or build system is valid, particularly when you're working on a project alone. However, I disagree with reverting to 2009 standards for HTML, CSS, and JavaScript.

Instead, you can adopt 2025 standards, including Web Components, JavaScript and CSS modules, and modern JavaScript (ECMAScript 2022, also known as ES13, and even ES15). Additionally, CSS Level 3 features such as variables and container queries, along with WCAG 2.2 guidelines, are all widely supported by the latest browsers.

[mushufasa]

I actually started my startup with this approach -- good old Django.

Lasted for a year until we had users wanting to do complex interactions on the frontend.

Simple CRUD apps are fine, but users expect a lot of interactivity these days where things on the screen interact with each other.

The nice thing about Django, though, is that you can easily switch to api-based backend with DRF or Django-Ninja. We used DRF but if I were to do it again, I'd choose ninja.

[r1290]

Same. I’m using Django with fast api. Then I have a nextjs front end. I do wish I could bake it all into Django but I’ve learned that it’s best to keep Django api first unless it’s a simple site/app. But with a lot of interaction, using react helps.

[number6]

Yeah we do this. Ninja is great.

React, not so much fun

[frankie_t]

Sorry for writing something a bit tangential, I'm mostly replying to the heading not the content.

I keep seeing the same point that argues against how "not fun, depressing, worse a <thing> has gotten these days". The most recent incarnation of that is how programming with AI feels worse than programming on your own.

I don't think the problem is inability to find a way to derive fun, the way you could previously. The problem is deriving fun while still getting paid for it.

To reiterate on the web-dev, you probably can make it fun again, given that you were able to have fun with it previously. But it probably will have to be done in your spare time after job.

[vouaobrasil]

Exactly. AI makes everything less fun because it turns what was once fun into an industry by its design.

[29ebJCyy]

I know this is somewhat antithetical to this article, but I’ve gotten similar vibes recently from Astro. Yes, I had to relearn some stuff, but once your brain starts thinking the Astro way, it mostly just works and feels closer to rails (but with the ability to craft weird fun JS experiences) than any JS tool I’ve used since Rails 4.

[bstsb]

completely opposite experience from me. i loved the original idea but i just can't get into the code fences and server/client rendering, nextjs has a clearer separation of concerns for me

[nico]

Personally, vibecoding has brought back a lot of the joy of coding

Being able to super quickly iterate, without caring too much about the results, but having fun seeing what comes up

I’ve really enjoyed exploring. Making small experiments, that you can make 5-10 of easily of in just one session

Like these silly things:

* https://openjam.ai/lonely_ant_702/vnqovd512h

* https://openjam.ai/stupid_coral_852/pvjda0dyc2

* https://openjam.ai/stupid_coral_852/qg8yembjg5

[beakerbox]

This is fun. I remixed this sci-fi black hole particle simulator by adding some sliders to adjust the particle movement. Amazing what a few prompts can do these days... https://openjam.ai/shocked_impala_852/jgoz80mge0/3

[2OEH8eoCRo0]

The recent vibe coding parlance confuses me. We have been vibe coding the whole time. If you write code before you have a design then you're vibe coding.

[rsolva]

I accidentally started having fun while wipping up a new website for a non-profit with relatively simple needs.

I started out with Server Side Includes on a shared host, but converted to using PHP along the way to be able to make a base file with all the stuff that is repeated (header, main, footer etc), and then injecting the content from index.php, /contact/index.php etc.

Turns out, you get really far with HTML, CSS and a light sprinkle of PHP, and it is super fun and fast and you get things EXACTLY how you want it. No fighting other peoples opinionated decisions.

I have created many sites from scratch with Hugo, and generally enjoy the process, but this is even more fun, because ... I can do whatever I want!

[lelanthran]

> I started out with Server Side Includes on a shared host, but converted to using PHP along the way to be able to make a base file with all the stuff that is repeated (header, main, footer etc), and then injecting the content from index.php, /contact/index.php etc.

I have a static file download only webapp[1], and I managed to get the includes done with only a 99-line JS component.

Honestly, once you get a decent way to specify, in HTML tags, include files, a significant portion of what you use a framework for (DRY) becomes redundant.

[1] Dynamic data to hydrate elements on the page is via API-only URLs.

[scruple]

I don't really have anything to add but I also recently spun up a Sinatra app for my personal use and I really had a lot of fun doing it. It was my first time using Ruby since 2022 when I left a Rails job, after having spent more than the previous decade primarily writing Ruby. I love the language and community so much but I don't have a professional use-case for it at my employer today, and I don't have a lot of free time in my personal life, so I just don't end up using it much. Thanks for sharing your thoughts here, I resonate with them a lot!

[ofrzeta]

"bring back Cloud Foundry"? It's not dead, afaik. Also there is Korifi, a project to bring the Cloudfoundry API to Kubernetes https://www.cloudfoundry.org/technology/korifi/

[DamnInteresting]

This is quite true. I like to build browser-based games, and it is much more fun and stimulating to write a lot of the bits in old-fashioned HTML+SCSS+Javascript. I still use libraries for tricky stuff, like handling audio playback, but it's not that hard to implement one's own drag-and-drop (for example), and it works very well. Plus, there is the added benefit of understanding how things work.

[pjmlp]

On hobby coding it is definitely fun as always.

PHP, ASP.NET or Spring/Quarkus, with just enough JavaScript, no npm, no builders, nothing.

Likewise with WebGL or WebGPU, direct src includes, no build.

[bob1029]

AspNetCore w/ absolute minimal usage of the abstractions has been my favorite web development experience by miles. Things like MVC and *.cshtml are really powerful but I find basics like PHP-style string interpolation to be way more intuitive and ergonomic.

All of my web resources have code like:

  httpContext.Response.WriteAsync(Layout(... inner HTML content ...));

Form submissions are super trivial to work with too. Covers 99% of my use cases. Every time I think I need something like web sockets, I can usually wiggle my way out of it with some kind of rearranging of the problem.

[rorylaitila]

I love the web. You can build almost any UI. It's constantly getting new tools. I think it's a 100 year platform.

I stay sane by shipping HTML over the wire from server rendered handlebars templates (Java/Lucee) against a MySQL database. Forms and Links only for navigation. JS for spice. My apps never break. Backwards compatible.

[chuckadams]

I'd love an environment so integrated I don't have to use a build system for anything complex, but I'm not going back to the likes of jQuery in vanilla JS. That's the opposite of fun to me. Vite may be a fiddly beast, but once it's set up, I just edit and see changes live, and I can do it while writing in a better language.

[eizaguir-lai]

Love this. This is a philosophy that I have been trying to espouse for a while now. Interesting that he said MVPs are too complicated, I love building quick apps in Rails. Might have to give Sinatra a try to see what he sees in it.

[wwall3r]

More startups should take this approach. Sure, they might need more styling/branding than you used, but this is so much snappier and accessible than the average SaaS product these days.

Yes, some of them have a case for local-first. If you do, you really should start with that out of the gate though.

[irrational]

I was a web developer since the mid-90s. I got out of it a few years ago because the direction web development was going in was so not fun. I still do personal web development because I find it enjoyable, but feel so much relief not to be doing it professionally any more.

[lifesaverluke]

Did you retire or switch industries?

[ericd]

I really like the “I can do things simply, because the backend is so fast” parts. Totally agree, and wish it was more common. Computers are fast, until we slow them down with layers upon layers of bullshit to crunch through to display a little snippet of text.

[mattl]

The amount of JavaScript required to submit a form should be zero. Browsers can already do basic validation of form fields.

Worse still are sites that require JavaScript to read them.

[bstsb]

for my personal website (admittedly a mostly static site) i ended up not using any frameworks, just html and js. forgot how fun it is to not worry about scalability or code reuse in hobby projects.

[iamflimflam1]

Seems relevant here - why is nextjs so popular? It’s always seemed a bit mad that people took a very nice static site system and decided to add a server to it.

[notyouraibot]

I agree, NextJS used to be my go to for building any kind of web applications, it was essentially a full stack framework capable of handling complex requirements, however since they decided to go all in on this new React Server Component bs, I'm so done. Sure there are some benefits here and there but overall, its a huge loss of DX and UX. React was always supposed to be a front end library, not a full stack framework and now the direction of React is being lead by the NextJS team so there is no hope.

[xythobuz]

That was a very fun read. Thank you.

[gaiagraphia]

Upgrading from Svelte 4 to 5 took out loads of joy from webdev ;(

[mediumsmart]

totally resonates thank you - have the server put a nonce on the form submission and when used, nuke it and 303 thank you maybe?

[mattl]

I was with you up until you used AI.

[simonw]

"Speaking of AI, is it any use? Well, somewhat. It writes half-useful CSS. It saves time on some things (but also makes bizarre choices on other things -- whatevs). I basically paired with it occasionally. It was OK."

Hardly a ringing endorsement there!

Apparently even saying "I tried AI and it was somewhat OK" is enough to summon the anti-AI comments.

[jacques_chester]

Fair enough. If it makes you feel better, I have a very different project where I have deliberately avoided any AI-generated code: https://github.com/jchester/spc-kit

[sublinear]

> I even eschewed HTMX. I bought the book! It's great, it made me feel hopeful, I want to use it someday. But I just ... didn't need it.

This is always true for any web project. HTMX is an abomination of opinions that are harmful to both small and large scale projects. It attempts to solve problems (poorly and naively) in the mid scale that almost nobody ever spends much time in. It's a toy for inexperienced managers to create bullshit maintenance work while they try to quickly jump to something else. We need to stop making crap like this and focus on coding according to web standards and sparingly add much better tools as the project scales up.

[recursivedoubts]

maybe check out fixi, our minimalist implementation of generalized hypermedia controls?

https://github.com/bigskysoftware/fixi

we are hopeful that w/the work of alex petro and the triptych project that we can get some of the core ideas of htmx into the HTML spec itself:

https://alexanderpetros.com/triptych/

[karolusrex]

I understand that this is intended as a rant - but these types of “case studies”, where someone starts a personal hobby project as a solo developer without using modern frameworks - are not very convincing. It would be an entirely different argument to point to a blog post of a larger organisation justifying their tech stack than these types of sources, that seem to be more common these days. Often the author is a backend developer who lacks any detailed knowledge of the problem space, and the comments section is usually full of fact errors and confusion.

[shayway]

I don't get the impression the author (of this post, or most others like it) is saying this approach should necessarily be used for complex apps in large organizations. The opposite, rather; that when working solo on hobby projects, modern frameworks are often unnecessary, and foregoing them can be more fun and productive than one might expect.

[lelanthran]

The "detailed knowledge of the problem space" appears to me to be "detailed knowledge of the hammers in use", not necessarily the problems these hammers once solved.

Often I find that the common web app needs nothing more than a few dozen helper js functions.

[justonceokay]

Having done back and and front end, I’m fully convinced that the frameworks are there only to help mediate a large team of developers all fiddling with the same codebase.

I haven’t been working on any sort of crazy features with elements moving around the page or excessive Ajax components (do they still call it that!?). On the other hand, most sites don’t have these features.

[chuckadams]

It's a blog. Not everything has to be communicated through a polished and organized corporate machine.

[mathgeek]

Requiring a company to tell you whether you’re having fun or not is certainly a take.