Gridsome VS Tailwind CSS

Thanks for reading!

The web tech stack is actually one of my biggest regrets. It's a static site generator called Gridsome[0] that the maintainers abandoned about three months after I used it to launch the TinyPilot website.

At the time I made the TinyPilot site, I was very excited about Vue, so a Vue-based SSG seemed great. Since then, I've come to find SPAs and most frontend frameworks to be way too much complexity, so I've moved away from Vue, but the TinyPilot website is still stuck on Vue 2.x and bootstrap-vue (which is tied to Vue 2 and Bootstrap 4).

So, it keeps creaking along, but building the 100ish pages on the site takes about five minutes, whereas I think something like Hugo could probably do it in a few seconds. Plus, we get random runtime errors[1] that are pretty hard to debug.

[0] https://gridsome.org/

[1] https://github.com/nuxt/nuxt/issues/5800

Nuxt.js and Gridsome are tailor-made for Vue.js developers.

Gridsome — Jamstack SSG tool for Vue developers

Node is basically back-end Javascript. While powerful alone, almost exclusively you will use a back-end framework like Next.js or Gatsby when using React, and then maybe Nuxt or Gridsome in Vue.

Among other thoughts, I considered a possibility of migration to a newer tech stack (because I can). Don't get me wrong, I actually love Gridsome (which is underneath my website now). But it's quite obsolete, and it's actually a dead project now.

One downside of Gridsome is that development seems to have stopped if you look at their github. For that reason I've recently switched my Gridsome clients to Nuxt

I definitely think Nuxt is worth learning for more than just a static site. However, there is a Gatsby-like Vue framework that focuses on SSG: https://gridsome.org/

Gridsome

All the Static Site Generators have been in the market for many years. With time, they get new improvements and upgrades as well. While considering SSG frameworks, like Gatsby, Nuxt, Gridsome, Next, and many more have been on the developer’s list for a long time. But when we talk about blazing fast web performance as per core web vital, then we have to do a lot of work in the available frameworks, after connecting a lot of dots (in terms of web performance), but still, we cannot achieve the web performance as per our need if we consider a use case of a large website where 20+ components are in one page.

Tailwind CSS: A utility-first CSS framework for rapidly building custom designs.

First, you need to make sure that you have a working Tailwind CSS project…

Tailwind CSS

With better CSS approaches like TailwindCSS and Vanilla Extract (which we're heavily using) it's much easier to maintain the UI and make sure it doesn't change unexpectedly. No more conflicting CSS classes, much less CSS specificity issues and much less CSS code in general.

This app was built with Svelte Kit, Tailwind CSS, and many other technologies. For a full rundown, please visit the GitHub repository

Unlike Tailwind, which has over 77,000 stars on GitHub, Mojo CSS has about 200 stars on GitHub. But the Mojo CSS documentation is fairly good and you can find most of the information you’ll need there.

JavaScript React Flowbite Tailwind Firebase - Auth, Database, and Hosting Vite

- Performance is a feature.

Another common interpretation of brutalism is aesthetic, reacting to overly complicated user interfaces by creating simpler, more direct ones. Tailwind CSS (https://tailwindcss.com), one of today's most popular CSS libraries, promotes this approach in its component examples. There's also a neat library I've seen recently called "Neobrutalism Components" for React that I like (https://neobrutalism-components.vercel.app), providing components with a similar look and feel to Gumroad. This might more accurately be called 'Neo-Brutalism,' as noted in the comments.

A more engineering-centric interpretation of Brutalism focuses on form, structure, and efficiency, drawing significantly from brutalist architecture principles. Apart from the user interface itself, most mobile, desktop, and web applications are extremely bloated and often perform worse than sites from 10 years ago did. While one HTML file might be "less brutalist" than the original HN site, it is substantially more brutalist than any HN mobile app in existence, and offers nearly identical functionality.

A broader interpretation of brutalism, which could be termed 'Meta-Brutalism,' is embodied in the overall experience on this site through UX flows. Yes, in the strictest sense, the original HN site is more Brutalist in many ways, but it only shows 30 articles at a time and does not function as a PWA. For this site, the experience of reading 10 stories is arguably less brutalist, but for quickly browsing through several pages and skimming articles (which is how I read HN) it is a lot faster, and in my opinion, more Brutalist.

My primary inspiration was addressing software and tool bloat in UIs rather than strictly adhering to every principle set forth by David Bryant Copeland. I don't find it convincing that this site "isn't brutalist" compared to really any other experience apart from the Main HN site, and I would argue the overall experience is more brutalist in its performance and scrolling behavior.

As a side note: I generally don't like Brutalist architecture that much although I believe it is unfairly maligned. I visited the Salk Institute once and enjoyed it though (https://www.archdaily.com/61288/ad-classics-salk-institute-l...).

- Staff Software Engineer ($275k/yr): https://tailwindcss.com/careers/staff-software-engineer

We're small, independent, and profitable, with a team of just 6 people doing millions in revenue, and growing sustainably every year. You'd work directly with the founders on open-source software used by millions of people.

If you like the idea of working on a small team that cares about craft and isn't trying to achieve VC scale, I think this is a pretty awesome place to do your best work.

Instead of Booststrap, I used Tailwind CSS as the CSS library.