Material-UI vs Next.js: What are the differences?
Material-UI and Next.js are primarily classified as "Front-End Frameworks" and "Frameworks (Full Stack)" tools respectively.
"React" is the primary reason why developers consider Material-UI over the competitors, whereas "Automatic server rendering and code splitting" was stated as the key factor in picking Next.js.
Material-UI and Next.js are both open source tools. It seems that Material-UI with 48.6K GitHub stars and 11K forks on GitHub has more adoption than Next.js with 38.7K GitHub stars and 4.69K GitHub forks.
According to the StackShare community, Next.js has a broader approval, being mentioned in 82 company stacks & 69 developers stacks; compared to Material-UI, which is listed in 69 company stacks and 80 developer stacks.
What is Material-UI?
What is Next.js?
Need advice about which tool to choose?Ask the StackShare community!
Sign up to add, upvote and see more prosMake informed product decisions
What are the cons of using Next.js?
Sign up to get full access to all the companiesMake informed product decisions
Sign up to get full access to all the tool integrationsMake informed product decisions
I just finished a web app meant for a business that offers training programs for certain professional courses. I chose this stack to test out my skills in graphql and react. I used Node.js , GraphQL , MySQL for the #Backend utilizing Prisma as a database interface for MySQL to provide CRUD APIs and graphql-yoga as a server. For the #frontend I chose React, styled-components for styling, Next.js for routing and SSR and Apollo for data management. I really liked the outcome and I will definitely use this stack in future projects.
When we started thinking about technology options for our own Design System, we wanted to focus on two primary goals
- Build a design system site using design system components - a living prototype
- Explore new ways of working to position our technical capabilities for the future
We have a small team of developers responsible for the initial build so we knew that we couldn’t spend too much time maintaining infrastructure on the Backend. We also wanted freedom to make decisions on the Frontend with the ability to adapt over time.
For this first iteration we decided to use Node.js, React, and Next.js. Content will be managed via headless CMS in prismic.io.
- Next.js so that we can run React serverside without worrying about server code.
- prismic.io so that our content is accessible via API and our frontend is fully independent.
At IT Minds we create customized internal or #B2B web and mobile apps. I have a go to stack that I pitch to our customers consisting of 3 core areas. 1) A data core #backend . 2) A micro #serverless #backend. 3) A user client #frontend.
For the Data Core I create a backend using TypeScript Node.js and with TypeORM connecting to a PostgreSQL Exposing an action based api with Apollo GraphQL
For the micro serverless backend, which purpose is verification for authentication, autorization, logins and the likes. It is created with Next.js api pages. Using MongoDB to store essential information, caching etc.
Finally the frontend is built with React using Next.js , TypeScript and @Apollo. We create the frontend as a PWA and have a AMP landing page by default.
I've been using Django for quite a long time and in my opinion I would never switch from it. My company is currently using Django with REST framework and a part in GraphQL using Graphene. On the frontend we use Next.js and so far everything has been running quite good. I've found limitations but manage to solve it.
As someone mentioned before, if you are comfortable with Django, don't switch. There's no need since with django you can basically achieve anything. Of course this will depend on the project you want to build, but the scalability and flexibility django can offer it's just out of this world. (Don't want to sound like a fan boy haha but it really is).
I picked up an idea to develop and it was no brainer I had to go with React for the frontend. I was faced with challenges when it came to what component framework to use. I had worked extensively with Material-UI but I needed something different that would offer me wider range of well customized components (I became pretty slow at styling). I brought in Evergreen after several sampling and reads online but again, after several prototype development against Evergreen—since I was using TypeScript and I had to import custom Type, it felt exhaustive. After I validated Evergreen with the designs of the idea I was developing, I also noticed I might have to do a lot of styling. I later stumbled on Material Kit, the one specifically made for React . It was promising with beautifully crafted components, most of which fits into the designs pages I had on ground.
A major problem of Material Kit for me is it isn't written in TypeScript and there isn't any plans to support its TypeScript version. I rolled up my sleeve and started converting their components to TypeScript and if you'll ask me, I am still on it.
In summary, I used the Create React App with TypeScript support and I am spending some time converting Material Kit to TypeScript before I start developing against it. All of these components are going to be hosted on Bit.
If you feel I am crazy or I have gotten something wrong, I'll be willing to listen to your opinion. Also, if you want to have a share of whatever TypeScript version of Material Kit I end up coming up with, let me know.
Material UI provides Cloudcraft.co with a clean, professional looking and very easy to use set of UI components build with React. The few issues we've reported to the developers have been quickly fixed each time. I highly recommend using Material UI for both consumer and enterprise web apps. The styling system in particular is very nice to work with, and allows you to easily add your own brand's look and feel throughout the UI.
We like the pure simplicity of Google's Material UI. It is simply too much overhead today to design custom UI styles.