• kibblebits@quokk.au
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    9
    ·
    18 days ago

    Because they add another layer that can make something more complex.

    The better question is: how can we make something less complex?

    While it’s not my preference, there’s a huge benefit to a basic LAMP stack with no JavaScript.

    • bitfucker@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      18 days ago

      The alternative to a less complex web is we will have more native applications. And honestly, I do not prefer that

      • kibblebits@quokk.au
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        18 days ago

        That doesn’t need to be the case. Yes, there is a place for a “web app” with advanced tech, but most of the web isn’t a web app.

        And, regarding native apps, that’s why there are downloadable web apps made in Wails, Tauri, or that disgusting Electron.

        • bitfucker@programming.dev
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          6
          ·
          18 days ago

          I assume you are one of those people that wants the web to go back to the 2000 era. Where JS is not as wide spread and multimedia is expensive to load. That’s why I assume if you want the web to be simpler you advocate for removing many of the current web standards/API. I meet too many people like that hence my immediate assumption

          • kibblebits@quokk.au
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            18 days ago

            I am not who you think I am. I also never said half of that. You seem like the type who likes to gaslight and imagine conversations.

            • bitfucker@programming.dev
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              3
              ·
              18 days ago

              Naah, I do not have imaginary conversation. Those are what many people I speak on some discord server actually say when they talk about the web being too complex. While they used discord. And many people at that. That’s why I jump to the assumptions, my bad then.

  • bitfucker@programming.dev
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    5
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    18 days ago

    More people needs to know about Vite PWA project. It will generate the service worker for you and still provide the escape hatch if you ever need to write it your own too!

    • python@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      18 days ago

      Oh I’ve set up a PWA with that before! It really is wonderful to use! (although my service workers are only an image caching layer for now as I need my data to stay fairly in sync with my db)

  • JakenVeina@midwest.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    18 days ago

    The caching and boot time scenario is very compelling, for teams who have an actual web APP to deploy, not just a web SITE, but… why were they not just leveraging the caching capabilities the browser ALREADY has?

    Like, genuine question: what caching capabilities does a Service Worker that the browser doesn’t already do?

    • bitfucker@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      16 days ago

      Offline cache becomes possible with PWA

      Edit to give concrete example: Mozilla MDN docs read later/read while offline

      I was wrong. It was not mozilla MDN. But I do remember an offline cache docs site