I'll just get straight to the point: I don't like web frameworks. In my experience, all they have done is overcomplicate, overcrowd, and generally bloat up projects, usually leading me to find an easier solution using plain-old HTML, CSS, & JavaScript. This led me to an interesting question; why do so many people shill and make it a point to use a web framework for every project, even when it feels unnecessary?
To tackle this problem we first need to look at the source; what is a web framework, and what was it designed to do? Well, firstly, a web framework is tool or package of tools usually used by a web developer to help them build a website more efficiently. However, the problem here is that 90% of internet sites are not huge megacorporation services like Google, YouTube, Facebook, Twitter, etc, but rather smaller sites like your local church, food pantry, plumber, or blog site; ones that don't require complicated functions like the bigger ones do.
The reality is, frameworks can offer some conveniences—things like routing, state management, and component reuse. But for small to medium-sized projects, especially those that don't require complex features, using a full-blown framework often feels like bringing a tank to a knife fight. The added layers of abstraction and opinionated structures can slow you down, obscure your understanding of what's actually happening under the hood, and create headaches during debugging.
I get it: frameworks are popular because they make large-scale applications more manageable and scalable. But that's just it: large projects. If your project doesn't need all that power, there's no reason to force it. HTML, CSS, and JavaScript have come a long way, and you can often achieve the same results with fewer dependencies, more control, and cleaner code.
At the end of the day, it's about knowing your tools. Sometimes the simpler solution is the better one.
Best regards,
73