Pros of next.js

• Official framework with extensive documentation and community support
• More comprehensive features and integrations out-of-the-box
• Regular updates and maintenance from Vercel team

Cons of next.js

• Steeper learning curve for beginners
• Less opinionated, requiring more setup for additional features
• Larger bundle size due to extensive feature set

Code Comparison

ts-nextjs-tailwind-starter:

import { AppProps } from 'next/app';
import '@/styles/globals.css';

function MyApp({ Component, pageProps }: AppProps) {
  return <Component {...pageProps} />;
}

next.js:

import '@/styles/globals.css';

export default function App({ Component, pageProps }) {
  return <Component {...pageProps} />;
}

The ts-nextjs-tailwind-starter example uses TypeScript and includes type annotations, while the next.js example is in JavaScript. The ts-nextjs-tailwind-starter provides a more structured starting point with TypeScript support, making it easier for developers to get started with a typed Next.js project. However, next.js offers more flexibility and can be customized to include TypeScript if desired.

Pros of ui

• More comprehensive UI component library with a wider range of pre-built components
• Highly customizable and themeable components using CSS variables
• Better accessibility support out-of-the-box

Cons of ui

• Steeper learning curve due to more complex component structure
• Less opinionated about project structure and routing compared to ts-nextjs-tailwind-starter
• May require more setup and configuration for a complete application

Code Comparison

ts-nextjs-tailwind-starter:

import { Button } from '@/components/buttons/Button';

export default function HomePage() {
  return <Button>Click me</Button>;
}

ui:

import { Button } from "@/components/ui/button"

export default function HomePage() {
  return <Button variant="outline">Click me</Button>
}

The ui repository offers more customization options for components, such as the variant prop in the Button example. However, ts-nextjs-tailwind-starter provides a simpler, more straightforward implementation that may be easier for beginners to understand and use.

Both repositories utilize TypeScript and Tailwind CSS, but ui focuses more on providing a comprehensive set of UI components, while ts-nextjs-tailwind-starter offers a complete project structure with routing and layout templates.

Pros of create-t3-app

• Includes tRPC for type-safe API routes, enhancing full-stack TypeScript development
• Offers built-in authentication with NextAuth.js, simplifying user management
• Provides Prisma integration for database operations, streamlining data handling

Cons of create-t3-app

• More complex setup and steeper learning curve due to additional technologies
• Less focus on UI components and styling compared to ts-nextjs-tailwind-starter
• May include unnecessary features for simpler projects, potentially increasing bundle size

Code Comparison

ts-nextjs-tailwind-starter:

import clsxm from '@/lib/clsxm';

const Button = ({ className, ...rest }: ButtonProps) => (
  <button
    className={clsxm(
      'inline-flex items-center rounded bg-primary-500 px-4 py-2 font-semibold text-white',
      className
    )}
    {...rest}
  />
);

create-t3-app:

import { signIn, signOut, useSession } from "next-auth/react";

export const AuthShowcase: React.FC = () => {
  const { data: sessionData } = useSession();

  return (
    <div className="flex flex-col items-center justify-center gap-4">
      <p className="text-center text-2xl text-white">
        {sessionData && <span>Logged in as {sessionData.user?.name}</span>}
      </p>
      <button
        className="rounded-full bg-white/10 px-10 py-3 font-semibold text-white no-underline transition hover:bg-white/20"
        onClick={sessionData ? () => void signOut() : () => void signIn()}
      >
        {sessionData ? "Sign out" : "Sign in"}
      </button>
    </div>
  );
};

Pros of TanStack Query

• Focused on data fetching and state management
• Powerful caching and synchronization features
• Widely adopted and battle-tested in production environments

Cons of TanStack Query

• Steeper learning curve for beginners
• Requires additional setup and configuration
• Not a complete application starter kit like ts-nextjs-tailwind-starter

Code Comparison

ts-nextjs-tailwind-starter:

import { NextPage } from 'next';
import Layout from '@/components/layout/Layout';

const HomePage: NextPage = () => {
  return <Layout>Home Page Content</Layout>;
};

TanStack Query:

import { useQuery } from '@tanstack/react-query';

function Example() {
  const { isLoading, error, data } = useQuery({
    queryKey: ['repoData'],
    queryFn: () => fetch('https://api.github.com/repos/tannerlinsley/react-query').then(res => res.json())
  });
}

The ts-nextjs-tailwind-starter provides a complete project structure with Next.js, TypeScript, and Tailwind CSS, making it easier to start a new project quickly. TanStack Query, on the other hand, focuses on efficient data fetching and state management, offering powerful tools for handling asynchronous data in React applications. While ts-nextjs-tailwind-starter is more suitable for rapid prototyping and general-purpose projects, TanStack Query excels in complex data-heavy applications that require advanced caching and synchronization capabilities.

Pros of tRPC

• Provides end-to-end typesafe APIs, enhancing developer experience and reducing runtime errors
• Offers automatic API documentation and client generation, streamlining development process
• Supports real-time subscriptions out of the box, enabling reactive applications

Cons of tRPC

• Requires a specific tech stack (TypeScript and React), limiting flexibility compared to the starter template
• Has a steeper learning curve for developers unfamiliar with RPC concepts
• May introduce additional complexity for smaller projects that don't require advanced API features

Code Comparison

ts-nextjs-tailwind-starter:

// pages/api/hello.ts
export default function handler(req: NextApiRequest, res: NextApiResponse) {
  res.status(200).json({ name: 'John Doe' })
}

tRPC:

// server/routers/user.ts
export const userRouter = router({
  getUser: publicProcedure
    .input(z.string())
    .query(({ input }) => {
      return { name: 'John Doe', id: input }
    }),
})

The ts-nextjs-tailwind-starter uses traditional Next.js API routes, while tRPC defines type-safe procedures that can be easily consumed on the client-side with full type inference.

Pros of Tailwind CSS

• Core CSS framework with extensive utility classes
• Highly customizable and configurable
• Large community and ecosystem

Cons of Tailwind CSS

• Requires additional setup for Next.js and TypeScript integration
• Lacks pre-configured components and layouts
• Steeper learning curve for developers new to utility-first CSS

Code Comparison

ts-nextjs-tailwind-starter:

import clsxm from '@/lib/clsxm';

const Button = ({ className, ...rest }: ButtonProps) => (
  <button
    className={clsxm(
      'rounded bg-primary-500 px-4 py-2 font-bold text-white hover:bg-primary-700',
      className
    )}
    {...rest}
  />
);

Tailwind CSS (raw usage):

<button class="rounded bg-blue-500 px-4 py-2 font-bold text-white hover:bg-blue-700">
  Click me
</button>

ts-nextjs-tailwind-starter provides a more structured approach with reusable components and TypeScript integration, while Tailwind CSS offers raw utility classes for direct use in HTML. The starter template simplifies development with Next.js and TypeScript, whereas Tailwind CSS requires manual setup for these technologies.