StackShareStackShare
Follow on
StackShare

Discover and share technology stacks from companies around the world.

Follow on

© 2025 StackShare. All rights reserved.

Product

  • Stacks
  • Tools
  • Feed

Company

  • About
  • Contact

Legal

  • Privacy Policy
  • Terms of Service
  1. Stackups
  2. Application & Data
  3. Frameworks
  4. Javascript Mvc Frameworks
  5. Ember.js vs Next.js

Ember.js vs Next.js

OverviewDecisionsComparisonAlternatives

Overview

Ember.js
Ember.js
Stacks1.6K
Followers865
Votes775
GitHub Stars22.6K
Forks4.2K
Next.js
Next.js
Stacks8.0K
Followers5.1K
Votes330
GitHub Stars135.4K
Forks29.7K

Ember.js vs Next.js: What are the differences?

Introduction

Ember.js and Next.js are both popular JavaScript frameworks used for building web applications. While they have some similarities, there are key differences between the two that make them suitable for different use cases.

  1. Server-side rendering vs. client-side rendering: One major difference between Ember.js and Next.js lies in their approach to rendering. Ember.js is a client-side rendering framework, meaning that the majority of the rendering is done on the client's browser. On the other hand, Next.js is a server-side rendering framework, which means that rendering is done on the server and the resulting HTML is sent to the client. This can have implications for performance, initial load time, and SEO.

  2. Opinionated vs. flexible architecture: Ember.js is known for its opinionated architecture and conventions, which provide a clear structure and guidance for developers. It enforces a specific coding style and encourages the use of conventions over configurations. In contrast, Next.js follows a more flexible approach, allowing developers to choose their own architectural patterns and configurations. This gives developers more freedom but may require more decision-making and setup.

  3. Learning curve and adoption: Ember.js has been around since 2011 and has a mature ecosystem with extensive documentation and a large community. While this can be beneficial for developers looking for support and resources, it also means that the framework has a steeper learning curve. Next.js, on the other hand, is a relatively newer framework that has gained popularity in recent years. It has a growing community but may not have the same level of resources and community support as Ember.js.

  4. Component-based vs. page-based approach: Ember.js follows a component-based architecture, where the application is divided into reusable components that encapsulate their own logic and presentation. This promotes code reusability and separation of concerns. Next.js, on the other hand, takes a page-based approach, where each page is treated as a separate entity and can have its own logic and styling. This can be more intuitive for developers coming from a traditional web development background.

  5. Data management: Ember.js provides a powerful data management system called Ember Data, which simplifies the handling of data persistence and synchronization with backend servers. It includes features like automatic change tracking, dirty state handling, and support for RESTful APIs. Next.js, being a framework for server-side rendering, does not have built-in data management capabilities but can work well with any data fetching library or API solution.

  6. Community and ecosystem: Ember.js has a larger and more established community compared to Next.js, which means that there is a wealth of plugins, addons, and community contributions available. This can be advantageous when looking for specific functionality or facing challenges during development. Next.js, on the other hand, is gaining momentum and has a growing ecosystem, but the range of available plugins and addons may be more limited in comparison.

In summary, Ember.js and Next.js differ in their rendering approach, architecture, learning curve, data management capabilities, and community support. Ember.js leans towards an opinionated architecture with client-side rendering, while Next.js offers more flexibility with a server-side rendering approach. The choice between the two frameworks depends on the specific requirements and preferences of the project at hand.

Share your Stack

Help developers discover the tools you use. Get visibility for your team's tech choices and contribute to the community's knowledge.

View Docs
CLI (Node.js)
or
Manual

Advice on Ember.js, Next.js

Taylor
Taylor

May 5, 2020

Review

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!

758k views758k
Comments

Detailed Comparison

Ember.js
Ember.js
Next.js
Next.js

A JavaScript framework that does all of the heavy lifting that you'd normally have to do by hand. There are tasks that are common to every web app; It does those things for you, so you can focus on building killer features and UI.

Next.js is a minimalistic framework for server-rendered React applications.

Creating web apps;Building UI
Zero setup. Use the filesystem as an API; Only JavaScript. Everything is a function; Automatic server rendering and code splitting; Data fetching is up to the developer; Anticipation is the key to performance; Simple deployment
Statistics
GitHub Stars
22.6K
GitHub Stars
135.4K
GitHub Forks
4.2K
GitHub Forks
29.7K
Stacks
1.6K
Stacks
8.0K
Followers
865
Followers
5.1K
Votes
775
Votes
330
Pros & Cons
Pros
  • 126
    Elegant
  • 97
    Quick to develop
  • 83
    Great mvc
  • 82
    Great community
  • 73
    Great router
Cons
  • 2
    Too much convention, too little configuration
  • 2
    Very little flexibility
  • 1
    Hard to use if your API isn't RESTful
  • 1
    Hard to integrate with Non Ruby apps
Pros
  • 51
    Automatic server rendering and code splitting
  • 44
    Built with React
  • 34
    Easy setup
  • 26
    TypeScript
  • 24
    Universal JavaScript
Cons
  • 9
    Structure is weak compared to Angular(2+)
Integrations
Node.js
Node.js
AngularJS
AngularJS
Bootstrap
Bootstrap
React
React

What are some alternatives to Ember.js, Next.js?

Node.js

Node.js

Node.js uses an event-driven, non-blocking I/O model that makes it lightweight and efficient, perfect for data-intensive real-time applications that run across distributed devices.

Rails

Rails

Rails is a web-application framework that includes everything needed to create database-backed web applications according to the Model-View-Controller (MVC) pattern.

AngularJS

AngularJS

AngularJS lets you write client-side web applications as if you had a smarter browser. It lets you use good old HTML (or HAML, Jade and friends!) as your template language and lets you extend HTML’s syntax to express your application’s components clearly and succinctly. It automatically synchronizes data from your UI (view) with your JavaScript objects (model) through 2-way data binding.

Django

Django

Django is a high-level Python Web framework that encourages rapid development and clean, pragmatic design.

Laravel

Laravel

It is a web application framework with expressive, elegant syntax. It attempts to take the pain out of development by easing common tasks used in the majority of web projects, such as authentication, routing, sessions, and caching.

.NET

.NET

.NET is a general purpose development platform. With .NET, you can use multiple languages, editors, and libraries to build native applications for web, mobile, desktop, gaming, and IoT for Windows, macOS, Linux, Android, and more.

ASP.NET Core

ASP.NET Core

A free and open-source web framework, and higher performance than ASP.NET, developed by Microsoft and the community. It is a modular framework that runs on both the full .NET Framework, on Windows, and the cross-platform .NET Core.

Vue.js

Vue.js

It is a library for building interactive web interfaces. It provides data-reactive components with a simple and flexible API.

Symfony

Symfony

It is written with speed and flexibility in mind. It allows developers to build better and easy to maintain websites with PHP..

Spring

Spring

A key element of Spring is infrastructural support at the application level: Spring focuses on the "plumbing" of enterprise applications so that teams can focus on application-level business logic, without unnecessary ties to specific deployment environments.

Related Comparisons

Bootstrap
Materialize

Bootstrap vs Materialize

Laravel
Django

Django vs Laravel vs Node.js

Bootstrap
Foundation

Bootstrap vs Foundation vs Material UI

Node.js
Spring Boot

Node.js vs Spring-Boot

Liquibase
Flyway

Flyway vs Liquibase