This post includes recommendations for teams that are procuring websites, and I think they can be summed up as: *buy simpler problems*.
Every feature that gets added via JavaScript is more complex, more expensive, and harder to improve. That means that when things go wrong, they're treble costly to fix because JS is *"f-it! we'll do it live!"* for web development. JS disables or routes around all the ways the browsers try to help.
Let browsers help!
@slightlyoff procurement processes, performance budgets, accessibility standards.
You pointed these things out in part 4, and I agree with them.
Frontend frameworks and code bloat are a symptom. I saw the same behaviour in Classic ASP as you're complaining about now in frontend frameworks.
Even without JavaScript, poorly run organisations will just make horrific sites on the server, fixing none of the issues you care about.
@caseyleask There's a noteworthy difference: ASP-era, server-side badness taxes the site owner's resources, and slow DB/service calls perform poorly for users regardless of client device, which is to say, it's a more egalitarian sort of slow.
JS bloat scales in impact with client device properties. That is, it makes an unequal situation worse for those with the least.
Alex Russell
Casey