[abraxas]

> Then the most complex front-end was having two forms

You have no clue what you're talking about. In the late nineties we had just about every bell and whistle working that I see in websites today, hardware limitations permitting. Some of it did not work well because client browsers were slow but it was all there: full interactivity through Java applets, VRML, media control API etc. Websites in the nineties were not two forms and a table tag. My masters project was embedding a voice recognition engine for interactive web search.

Yeah we didn't do SPAs and instead implemented interactivity locally. That was a good thing that you threw in the garbage for a fad.

[MrJohz]

It seems odd to bring in Java applets and similar technologies to the discussion when the original point was that web development shouldn't need a build step. And isn't the whole point of SPAs to implement local interactivity? I.e. treat the client as a separate application (just like you would with an applet) and move session logic out of the server?

If anything, I think it's remarkable how far we've graduated from that point: many features components and features that we used to have to build by hand are now directly implemented in the browser; Javascript is significantly easier and nicer to use, even without having to apply a build step (even just splitting scripts into separate modules is now supported natively!); and features that previously required potentially insecure plugins to be enabled are now controlled by the browser, giving users much more ability to control what their browser is doing or not doing. Even if you do want more complex development with build steps, with tools like Parcel and Vite, that's usually pretty simple at this point (certainly simpler than the last few Java builds that I've seen).

It seems like you're complaining that everything is worse now because it's possible to have stupid amounts of complexity these days, but it's also a lot easier to have no complexity at all.

[forgotpwd16]

>full interactivity through Java applets

Not sure we're even on the same page if your argument on "sites were as complex back in the good old days" is embedding a literally distinct program on site, which quite ironically also happens to include its own complicated tooling and building.

>instead implemented interactivity locally

Umm, what you think SPAs are?