When it comes to building web applications, developers are often drawn to the latest and greatest technologies. Single-page applications (SPAs) have become the go-to solution for many, promising a smoother, more interactive user experience. But are they really the best choice for every situation?
In this episode of SaaS That App: Building B2B Web Applications, hosts Aaron Marchbanks and Justin Edwards are joined by Daniel Cannon, Chief Innovation Officer at Delta Systems, to take a critical (yet fair) look at SPAs vs. multi-page applications (MPAs).
While SPAs offer undeniable benefits, they also introduce significant trade-offs that might make you think twice before jumping on the bandwagon.
Why SPAs Became so Popular
SPAs have gained traction due to their ability to deliver seamless, app-like experiences within a browser. By loading content dynamically rather than requiring full page reloads, SPAs create a snappy, responsive interface. Popular examples include Gmail, Google Maps, and Facebook’s news feed.
As Daniel explains, SPAs are particularly useful for interactive applications where users expect real-time updates. Nobody wants to click “Like” on a Facebook post and wait for an entire page refresh before seeing that blue thumbs-up appear.
From a business perspective, SPAs also allow developers to shift computing power from their servers to users’ devices, reducing backend load. This scalability can be beneficial for companies with large user bases, like social media platforms. However, just because something is popular doesn’t mean it’s the best choice for every project.
The Downsides: When SPAs Become a Liability
While SPAs provide a smoother user experience in some cases, they also come with notable drawbacks. Here are a few key concerns:
- Overhead and Complexity
SPAs require loading a large JavaScript bundle upfront, which can slow down initial load times, especially on slower networks. Developers often don’t fully consider the added complexity of managing state, caching, and API interactions in SPAs. This results in bloated applications that require significant maintenance.
- Data Consistency and Caching Issues
One of the biggest headaches with SPAs is ensuring data consistency. Since SPAs fetch data from APIs rather than reloading pages, there’s always a risk of displaying outdated information. This issue is compounded when users interact with data that is updated frequently, such as financial applications or collaborative tools.
- SEO Challenges
MPAs have a natural advantage when it comes to SEO. Since each page is loaded separately, search engines can easily index content. With SPAs, however, the entire application is typically rendered through JavaScript, making it difficult for search engine crawlers to interpret the content. There are workarounds like server-side rendering (SSR) and prerendering, but they introduce additional complexity.
- Security Risks
Because SPAs handle most of their logic on the client side, they can introduce security vulnerabilities if not properly designed. Many developers make the mistake of enforcing authentication only in the front end, which can be easily bypassed by a savvy attacker.
When MPAs Might Be a Better Choice
Multi-page applications (MPAs) may not be as trendy, but they offer some significant advantages:
- Simpler state management: MPAs handle data more reliably since each page reloads completely, reducing the risk of stale information.
- Better SEO: Traditional websites with static pages perform better in search rankings.
- Lower complexity: With fewer moving parts, MPAs are easier to maintain and debug.
- Enhanced security: Since MPAs rely on server-side rendering, authentication and authorization checks are more centralized.
Daniel and Justin emphasize that for many SaaS businesses, especially those focused on content delivery or eCommerce, an MPA might be the more practical choice.
The Best of Both Worlds
For those who want SPA-like interactivity without all the drawbacks, hybrid approaches are becoming more popular. One such solution is Turbo, a modern framework in Ruby on Rails that enables snappy, interactive user experiences without the overhead of a full-fledged SPA.
Daniel is a strong advocate for Turbo, explaining how it allows developers to build applications that “feel” like SPAs while maintaining the reliability of MPAs.
Another alternative is Next.js, which blends static site generation with server-side rendering, allowing developers to optimize performance and SEO while still enjoying the flexibility of React.
Making the Right Choice
So, should you build your next web application as an SPA? It depends.
If your app requires real-time updates, mobile app-like responsiveness, and offline capabilities, a SPA might be a good choice.
But if your primary concerns are SEO, data consistency, or simplicity, an MPA or a hybrid approach may be a better fit.
Final Thoughts from Daniel
SPAs may be the shiny new tool in the developer’s arsenal, but they’re not always the right one. Before committing to an architecture, take a step back and evaluate your needs. Consider the trade-offs in performance, complexity, SEO, and security. Whether you go with an SPA, MPA, or a hybrid solution like Turbo or Next.js, making an informed decision will save you headaches down the road.
Daniel’s Background
Daniel Cannon is the Chief Innovation Officer at Delta Systems, Co-Founder of Iterative Consulting, and Founder of StriveDB. He brings a wealth of experience in modern web development frameworks and architectures. His expertise spans full-stack development, with particular depth in Ruby on Rails and modern JavaScript frameworks. Daniel’s hands-on experience with both traditional and cutting-edge technologies, combined with his ability to evaluate technical trade-offs in practical business contexts, provides valuable insights for organizations navigating technology decisions.
Listen to the new episode on: