vercel VS Tailwind CSS

Frontend: Developed with Remix, hosted on Vercel

Choosing Vercel was a natural decision as it has become the default method for launching apps that are accessible to a wide audience. The simplicity of configuring environment variables, domains, and other settings facilitated this choice. We have implemented feature branch deployment to guarantee that the code is operational and prepared for peer review.

Next, we'll deploy our ecommerce website to Vercel (which is a great choice to host your Next.js website). Other hosting options include Netlify and Render.

This approach has seen a proliferation of platforms that offer this as a service(Netlify, Vercel, Cloudflare etc.) and also a proliferation of frameworks with different strengths and weaknesses(list of frameworks supported cloudflare).

Next.js: Highly optimized for production from the start, with features tailored for performance in real-world scenarios, including extensive support for SEO and server-side capabilities. Note: With deployment to Vercel is free and comes with additional free tooling such as website analytics and more.

Easily deploy your Next.js app with Vercel by clicking the button below:

Now go to https://vercel.com, sign up for an account, and click "New Project". Connect your GitHub account and give Vercel permission to access your repositories.

Next.js has become a standard choice for developing React applications, offering various deployment options across different platforms. While Vercel is a popular choice for building and deployment, specific project requirements may require deployment to GitLab. In this guide, I'll illustrate the process of deploying a Next.js application to GitLab Pages.

I hosted my portfolio in Vercel. The main reason why I chose it is the hosting has great support for NextJS and IMPORTANT THING, it is total FREE 🤑 (with my usage). And I have use GitHub Action for deploy it automatically when I make or merge change into main branch.

To do this just head over to Vercel and log in if you're not already logged in. If this is your first project, you'll be seeing something like this.

Finally, for our front end, we’re going to be pairing Next.js with the great combination of TailwindCSS and shadcn/ui so we can focus on building the functionality of the app and let them handle making it look awesome!

You can use any frontend framework you want — react-based tooling, however, has a natural advantage as it models everything as a function of state, which can map 1:1 with the concept in Burr. In the demo app we use react, react-query, and tailwind, but we’ll be skipping over this largely (it is not central to the purpose of the post).

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...).