Need advice about which tool to choose?Ask the StackShare community!
Hugo vs Next.js: What are the differences?
- Cost: One key difference between Hugo and Next.js is the cost. Hugo is an open-source static site generator that is free to use, while Next.js is a framework built on top of React and requires additional hosting costs for server-side rendering or static site generation.
- Programming Language: Another important difference is the programming language used. Hugo is built with Go, a statically typed compiled language, while Next.js is built with JavaScript, a dynamically typed scripting language.
- Build Process: The build process is also different between Hugo and Next.js. Hugo uses a single command to generate the entire site, making it quick and efficient. On the other hand, Next.js uses a build pipeline and requires the use of webpack or other bundlers to compile and optimize the code.
- Performance: Performance is another factor where Hugo and Next.js differ. Hugo generates static HTML files, resulting in fast and efficient websites. Next.js, on the other hand, allows for server-side rendering or static site generation, providing dynamic content and faster load times for the user.
- Flexibility: Next.js offers more flexibility when it comes to customization and adding interactivity to the website. With React as its foundation, Next.js allows for more complex front-end functionality and easy integration with other libraries and frameworks.
- Content Management: Lastly, the way content is managed differs between Hugo and Next.js. Hugo primarily uses Markdown or other file formats for content creation, while Next.js can integrate with various content management systems, such as headless CMS platforms, enabling easier content editing and collaboration.
In summary, Hugo and Next.js differ in terms of cost, programming language, build process, performance, flexibility, and content management.
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.
As a Frontend Developer I wanted something simple to generate static websites with technology I am familiar with. GatsbyJS was in the stack I am familiar with, does not need any other languages / package managers and allows quick content deployment in pure HTML or Markdown (what you prefer for a project). It also does not require you to understand a theming engine if you need a custom design.
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 Hugo
- Lightning fast47
- Single Executable29
- Easy setup26
- Great development community24
- Open source23
- Write in golang13
- Not HTML only - JSON, RSS8
- Hacker mindset8
- LiveReload built in7
- Gitlab pages integration4
- Easy to customize themes4
- Very fast builds4
- Well documented3
- Fast builds3
- Easy to learn3
Pros of Next.js
- Automatic server rendering and code splitting51
- Built with React44
- Easy setup34
- TypeScript26
- Universal JavaScript24
- Zero setup22
- Static site generator21
- Just JavaScript12
- Simple deployment12
- 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
Sign up to add or upvote prosMake informed product decisions
Cons of Hugo
- No Plugins/Extensions4
- Template syntax not friendly2
- Quick builds1
Cons of Next.js
- Structure is weak compared to Angular(2+)9