Removing Next.js Got My Blog to 100 on Every Lighthouse Category

(korindiehacker.bloffy.blog)

72 points | by textlanes33 2 hours ago

8 comments

  • SwellJoe 4 minutes ago
    I use Hugo published to Github Pages for my blog. I've never thought about performance (it's Fast Enough™ when I visit it), but I just checked and it's 100 on pagespeed. The magic of a static HTML blog is you don't have to think about performance. An entire category of problem just disappears.
  • 4pkjai 30 minutes ago
    I wrote not so basic CRUD application that uses HTML and vanilla javascript. I don't even minify the javascript. That website loads significantly faster than all the other websites I have made.
    • smt88 7 minutes ago
      This is obvious and not an interesting observation.

      The question is how to get a good and efficient dev experience while also preserving that level of speed.

      AI has now made that question mostly irrelevant, since it can generate and rapidly edit vanilla webpages without a framework to make the DX better.

  • dzink 20 minutes ago
    I’ve been beating giants in SEO with a static site precompiled at deployment time through includes.
  • benmccann 18 minutes ago
    I got straight 100s using SvelteKit on https://c3.ventures
  • post-it 24 minutes ago
    We use nextjs at work and I hate it. Why write each view once when you could write it twice?

    I'm open to the idea that we're doing it wrong and that there's a correct and pleasant way to write nextjs, but I think with the tools available today, everyone should just profile and optimize their app so they don't need to render it serverside.

    • chrisweekly 1 minute ago
      I recommend ditching Next.js in favor of Tanstack Start^1, an alternative metaframework that gives you more freedom, better DX, and better defaults. Stick w the best aspects of SPAs and introduce SSR selectively if and when it makes sense.

      1. https://tanstack.com/blog/tanstack-start-1-0

  • aftbit 50 minutes ago
    What are the best static site generators for blogs these days?
    • arecsu 46 minutes ago
      I love Astro. It is so extensive to your liking and if you want to have complex interactive stuff at some point, you can just add a framework of your liking (react, vue, svelte, etc) and it will still work wonders. It doesn't abstract that much, and yet provides a nice UX and performance is top notch, which is why I love it so much. You can do from the most simplest website and blog on it, to the most complex content driven websites. I use it for so many different things, both hobbyist and professionally.
    • burntcaramel 8 minutes ago
      I made QIP Router where every part of rendering and making the HTTP response is customizable via WebAssembly. You often have a lot more control than a traditional static site generator that requires a particular plugin made — just make your own!

      https://qip.dev/docs/router

    • abound 39 minutes ago
      I use Hugo for one blog [1] and Zola for another [2], I think they're both pretty simple to use once you wrap your mind around how they structure things.

      Astro is also great (as others have noted) esp if you want to leverage the JS ecosystem at large.

      [1] https://frominsidethebox.com

      [2] https://yakshed.com

    • esperent 31 minutes ago
      I'm going to push back against Astro because all the server island stuff is over-engineered for a blog, while in the meantime Astro is not designed for more complex sites so I'm not sure what it's purpose is really.

      I would say that in the era of agentic coding you don't need any framework. Just a backend + router + markdown generator. I use Hono + Tanstack router for the first two. Tell any decent LLM to wire those up for you and you'll have a simple static site ready to go in an hour or two.

    • analog_daddy 20 minutes ago
      Not sure about the best, but Zola is good enough for basic blogging needs. I liked the part that it was a single binary, so you don’t have to keep up with any breaking changes unless you want a new feature or a bug is bothering you.

      Whatever you use, I feel it is tradition to have 3 odd blog posts about journey of building a SSG of your own since nothing else matched exactly what you needed and that’s it. Then you should forget that blog ever existed.

    • dotnetcarpenter 46 minutes ago
    • danpalmer 31 minutes ago
      I'm on Hugo. It's simple, capable, well documented, LLMs understand it well, and I don't have to touch the JS ecosystem. My previous setup was with a Node based SSG and it broke on literally every update and had a hundred dependencies.
    • OuterVale 25 minutes ago
      So many great options. I always opt for Web Origami though.

      It is more like a dialect of JavaScript optimised for developing static sites than a static site generator in and of itself. It has lots of 'builtins' for things like RSS and converting Markdown to HTML. It is so wonderfully flexible and doesn't lock you into a specific site structure like others SSGs do.

      https://weborigami.org/

    • ErenayDev 20 minutes ago
      I use Zine [1]. its inspired from Hugo, written in Zig. but probably not the "best" for some use cases.

      [1] https://zine-ssg.io

    • hutusi 29 minutes ago
      I created a static blog framework called Amytis: https://github.com/hutusi/amytis and I'm really excited for you to give it a try.
    • jazzypants 42 minutes ago
      Astro is fantastic.

      https://astro.build/

    • 7777777phil 25 minutes ago
      I love using hugo. Also wrote about some time ago how I got a perfect 100/100 Lighthouse score with Hugo and plain CSS. Feel free to have a look: https://philippdubach.com/posts/hugo-lighthouse-100/
    • verdverm 46 minutes ago
      I'm using tanstack+tailwind and Ai to write a few scripts for doing what static generators would do. Keep it simple, make it unique, bring back the weird
    • slopinthebag 45 minutes ago
      ai. like have them take your language of choice, your templating of choice, your architecture of choice etc and spit out something. they've seen enough that it can pretty much oneshot something relatively simple.

      edit: i mean have the ai write the generator, don't use it to actually generate pages...

      • brlewis 35 minutes ago
        This is the right answer to the vague question of "best".

        I started with an empty repo, wrote the first half of a README describing my decision-making process in choosing a static site generator, and conversed with an AI to finish the decision and set everything up.

        https://writing.brlewis.com/posts/2026/blog-based-on-git/

  • LoganDark 21 minutes ago
    Caching isn't essential if you can come up with the pages fast enough, unless you need a CDN due to factors like distance.
  • andrewmcwatters 50 minutes ago
    [dead]