jQuery v4.0 Beta

Original Article ↗ Hacker News Discussion ↗

jQuery 4.0 Beta is prompting renewed debate over the library’s place in modern web development, as many engineers now try to remove it from codebases while others still rely on it heavily. Supporters argue that jQuery’s concise, fluent API, massive plugin ecosystem, and suitability for “just a bit of interactivity” on server-rendered sites keep it valuable, especially in legacy systems and platforms like WordPress. Critics counter that modern browser APIs and frameworks such as React, Vue, and htmx offer better patterns for complex applications, making jQuery feel outdated beyond small, low-complexity pages.

Who Still Uses jQuery and Why

  • Widely used in legacy apps, internal tools, admin dashboards, and low-cost agency sites.
  • Deeply entrenched in WordPress and its plugin ecosystem; this alone keeps jQuery relevant.
  • Favored by solo/small teams and backend-heavy devs who need “just enough” UI without modern tooling.
  • Common for quick data tables, form enhancements, carousels, and light interactivity on mostly server-rendered sites.

Perceived Strengths of jQuery

  • Consistent, concise, and fluent API for selection, events, AJAX, and DOM manipulation.
  • Many find the API easier to remember and more readable than native DOM methods and fetch.
  • Progressive enhancement fits well: HTML first, CSS second, then optional JS.
  • Rich plugin ecosystem (e.g., DataTables, select2, table sorters) solves common UI problems with minimal code.
  • Some still see vanilla DOM APIs as verbose, awkward, or poorly designed compared to jQuery’s abstractions.

Critiques and Reasons to Move Away

  • Modern browsers now cover most of jQuery’s original value (selectors, events, AJAX, animation).
  • Maintaining large jQuery apps is described as painful: global selectors, scattered event handlers, and mutation-based logic make behavior hard to reason about.
  • For complex, app-like UIs, component frameworks (React, Vue, Svelte, etc.) are seen as easier to maintain, test, and evolve.
  • jQuery encourages ad hoc snippets and can hide behavior, complicating debugging and upgrades.
  • Upgrading across major jQuery versions can be risky because of its flexible API; some mention migration helpers but still see friction.

jQuery vs. Modern Alternatives

  • For small interactions, some prefer vanilla JS or thin helper libraries; others say jQuery remains more succinct.
  • There’s debate over whether frameworks are overkill for simple sites; several draw a clear line between “web sites” (fine with jQuery/vanilla) and “web apps” (better with frameworks).
  • Emerging tools like htmx, Unpoly, and server-side rendering frameworks are seen by some as spiritual successors to jQuery’s simplicity.

Outlook

  • Many expect jQuery to persist for years due to legacy dependence, even if few greenfield projects start with it.
  • Some argue it’s “outdated but fine”; others insist it’s still “awesome” for its niche.