Need advice about which tool to choose?Ask the StackShare community!
Next.js vs Rocket: What are the differences?
Server-side rendering (SSR) vs Client-side rendering (CSR): A key difference between Next.js and Rocket is their rendering approach. Next.js supports server-side rendering, which means that the server renders the components before sending them to the client's browser. This allows for faster initial loading times and improved SEO. On the other hand, Rocket uses client-side rendering, where the rendering happens on the client's browser using JavaScript after the initial HTML and CSS have been loaded. This can result in slower initial loading times but allows for more interactive and dynamic experiences.
Routing: Next.js provides automatic routing, meaning that you don't need to set up individual routes for each page. It automatically generates routes based on the file structure in the project. Rocket, on the other hand, requires explicit routing configuration using its routing macros. You need to define the routes explicitly, specifying the corresponding handlers.
Language/Framework: Next.js is built on top of React, a popular JavaScript library for building user interfaces. It provides a framework for server-side rendering React applications. Rocket, on the other hand, is written entirely in Rust, a systems programming language known for its performance and safety.
Build and Deployment: Next.js simplifies the build and deployment process by providing a ready-to-use build command. It also supports easy deployment to platforms like Vercel, making it convenient for deploying Next.js applications. In contrast, Rocket requires manual configuration and handling for building and deploying Rust applications. This might require more effort and expertise in Rust development and deployment workflows.
Package Ecosystem: Next.js benefits from a rich ecosystem of packages and libraries built for React. It can leverage these packages to enhance the development experience and add additional functionalities. Rocket, being a Rust framework, has access to a different set of libraries and tools in the Rust ecosystem. The choice of ecosystem depends on the specific needs and requirements of the project.
Maturity and Community: Next.js has been around for a longer time and has a more established community. It has been widely adopted by developers and has a larger pool of resources, tutorials, and community support available. Rocket, being relatively newer, has a smaller community and fewer resources. However, the Rust community is known for its quality and focus on performance, which can be advantageous for some projects.
In Summary, Next.js and Rocket differ in their rendering approach, routing mechanism, language/framework, build and deployment process, package ecosystem, and maturity/community support. The choice between them depends on the specific requirements, preferences, and expertise of the development team.
We choose Next.js for our React framework because it's very minimal and has a very organized file structure. Also, it offers key features like zero setups, automatic server rendering and code splitting, typescript support. Our app requires some loading time to process the video, server-side rendering will allow our website to display faster than client-side rending.
We’re a new startup so we need to be able to deliver quick changes as we find our product market fit. We’ve also got to ensure that we’re moving money safely, and keeping perfect records. The technologies we’ve chosen mix mature but well maintained frameworks like Django, with modern web-first and api-first front ends like GraphQL, NextJS, and Chakra. We use a little Golang sparingly in our backend to ensure that when we interact with financial services, we do so with statically compiled, strongly typed, and strictly limited and reviewed code.
You can read all about it in our linked blog post.
Next.js is probably the most enjoyable React framework our team could have picked. The development is an extremely smooth process, the file structure is beautiful and organized, and the speed is no joke. Our work with Next.js comes out much faster than if it was built on pure React or frameworks alike. We were previously developing all of our projects in Meteor before making the switch. We left Meteor due to the slow compiler and website speed. We deploy all of our Next.js projects on Vercel.
Hey guys,
My backend set up is Prisma / GraphQL-Yoga at the moment, and I love it. It's so intuitive to learn and is really neat on the frontend too, however, there were a few gotchas when I was learning! Especially around understanding how it all pieces together (the stack). There isn't a great deal of information out there on exactly how to put into production my set up, which is a backend set up on a Digital Ocean droplet with Prisma/GraphQL Yoga in a Docker Container using Next & Apollo Client on the frontend somewhere else. It's such a niche subject, so I bet only a few hundred people have got a website with this stack in production. Anyway, I wrote a blog post to help those who might need help understanding it. Here it is, hope it helps!
Pros of Next.js
- Automatic server rendering and code splitting50
- Built with React43
- Easy setup33
- TypeScript26
- Universal JavaScript24
- Zero setup22
- Static site generator21
- Simple deployment12
- Just JavaScript12
- Incremental static regeneration12
- Filesystem as an API10
- Frictionless development10
- Everything is a function9
- Well Documented9
- Has many examples and integrations8
- Testing8
- Isomorphic React applications7
- File based routing + hooks built in4
- Deployment2
- SEO1
Pros of Rocket
- Easy to use4
- Uses all the rust features extensively4
- Django analog in rust1
- Inbuilt templating feature1
- Provides nice abstractions1
Sign up to add or upvote prosMake informed product decisions
Cons of Next.js
- Structure is weak compared to Angular(2+)9
Cons of Rocket
- Only runs in nightly1