[radicalriddler]

This is why I'm bear-ish on Next.JS as a framework. Vercel has some super cool features for Next.Js that are easy to integrate into your app, but is that de-incentivizing Next.JS to implement them in an open way?

Vercel is a hyper for-profit and closed platform, is that blocking innovation on Next.JS as an "open-source" framework?

[krono]

Right around the time when Vercel introduced their performance analytics upsell service, they deleted the NextJS documentation on "web vitals" gathering - same thing, but without the service.

Then again when they introduced their new Image component for the longest time it would by default use Vercel's paid image optimisation services, eventually it could be disabled but only with some weird and poorly/confusingly documented custom configuration entry.

There are more instances of similar such questionable actions by the NextJS maintainers. I'd rather have seen them just be open about what drove them to do these things.

[radicalriddler]

The image one was what I had in mind as well. Looks like they've updated the documentation with code snippets to help people out a little more, but back when I first did it, those docs were SLIM

[chipgap98]

Yeah I've switched all of my projects to Remix to get out of the Vercel ecosystem

[chrisco255]

Not really. Next.js is built on Node.js + React (both of which are also open source).

The services Vercel offers have to do with deployment mainly. That's never going to be something a back end or front end framework will help you with directly.

App hosting and deployment has always been a secondary concern. Choice of database, caching, queuing service, etc has also always been a secondary concern apart from a backend/frontend framework.