The business case for Vanilla JS: one ex-frontend dev’s return to basics

The argument

It has been reported that a former front-end developer, who once "bundled, transpiled, reacted and source mapped," now prefers writing plain JavaScript against browser APIs for production work. The author recounts a pair of small-but-revealing projects — a tight-deadline job where a 50‑line stream object and a bit of DOM scripting just worked, and a later report app where Preact’s hydration errors nudged him back to the platform. He felt lied to, he writes; the emotional beat is clear: what used to feel like wizardry now feels like overcomplication.

Why it matters

The case for Vanilla JS here is pragmatic: fewer moving parts, better backward compatibility from browser APIs, and a maintenance story the author says is easier to reason about over months and years. It has been reported that he also argues vanilla code is better documented and friendlier to LLMs that generate code — no build chains, source maps, or transpilers to get in the way. React and similar frameworks, he claims, provide an alternate abstraction that often leaks when you reach for hooks, refs, or hydration fixes — an argument some will nod at and others will loudly contest.

Is this the death knell for SPAs? Not exactly. Frameworks still win when you need ecosystems, conventions, or large teams glued to a single mental model. But the piece lands as part of a broader trend: framework fatigue, smaller islands of interactivity, and a renewed taste for platform primitives. It’s a reminder that "simpler" can be a strategic choice, not just nostalgia — practical, maintainable, and yes, sometimes a lot less annoying.

Sources: lewiscampbell.tech, Lobsters