Choosing Wisely: SPA vs. HTMX for Your Next Web Project with Chris May
summary
Compares SPA cost and complexity with server-driven alternatives and shows concrete wins: HTMX, AlpineJS and Django Unicorn underpin a streamed HTML components pattern that cuts cold-start pain, reduced time to interactive from 6s to 2s in a case study, and slashes frontend surface area — one project reports lines of code cut by over 90% and another multiplies story-point throughput by five; demos replace a 4-minute task with a 20-second streamed HTML workflow.
AI-written summary · about
chapters (17)
- 0:00Introduction
- 2:08Problem with SPAs
- 5:37Three web app patterns
- 8:26Progressive enhancement
- 10:15SPA JavaScript costs
- 12:01When SPAs are worth it
- 13:26Why complexity kills SPA projects
- 15:50Component islands pattern
- 18:17HTML vs JSON responses
- 19:18Django Unicorn demo
- 21:02Streamed HTML components
- 22:45HTMX and Alpine JS tools
- 25:34Umuzi HTMX success
- 28:25Context’s HTMX switch
- 30:32Grocery store demo
- 34:07Recap and key takeaways
- 34:53Q&A
related talks
57mHTMX: Why You Don't Always Need a SPA Framework
49mBring back the joy in web development with HTMX and Hypermedia-Driven Applications
26mReimagining dynamic web apps with HTMX
38mAchieving SPA-quality with HTMX and Twig
41mRapid server side full stack web development with ViewComponents and htmx
26mModern web apps with (almost) no JS: Enhancing UX with HTMX in Django
23mIntroduction to server-driven web applications using htmx
37mHTMX: Frontend Revolution