...those teams adopt FWs but also take them apart and put them back together in leaner, meaner configurations.
-
-
Those teams also tend to have a bias toward less-opinionated stacks (because rebuilding/reconfiguration).
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
For the other side of the distribution, those choices are *toxic*. And that's basically everyone.
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
Most folks aren't using frameworks as an accelerant to what they know they wanted, they're using them as a level-up. Access to a higher tier
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
...but they don't know what they don't know, so when the community leaves things as an exercise to the reader, it's pure perf/UX
#fail1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
*this is nearly every app I trace* Opinionated stacks are better for nearly all, but not "cool".
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
For ~every team in '17, starting with a framework and not an opinionated starter-kit that gets build, code-splitting, etc. right is

2 replies 0 retweets 3 likes -
Unless the framework is one of the heavyweight desktop-era dinosaurs, FW choice not hugely important. Architecture matters more.
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
The point of a framework is supposed to be one that encapsulates architectural best practices, but that’s lost on most.
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
Most frameworks do this at the component level, not app structure level. It's when things scale up that they go to the dogs in these traces.
1 reply 1 retweet 0 likes
I always suggest teams start with tools that set them up for success. Most don't.
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.
& Web Standards TL; Blink API OWNER
Named PWAs w/
DMs open. Tweets my own; press@google.com for official comms.