(I didn't downvote you, I really don't mind, but it did sound aggressive).
Here's what you wrote:
>> Too bad. The author addressed everything you said. You just didn't read past the sentence you quoted.
>> Nowhere does the piece imply that you should render every state change server-side. In fact, it goes on to show, with specific examples, of how you can get data-binding and partial-update behavior with web-native APIs. The argument is that most people don't need React, not that they don't need AJAX or data binding.
Here's a political rewrite (Keep in mind I'm not a native english speaker):
It seems that the author addressed your points later in the article. For instance, rather than rendering every state change on the server-side, it explains how you can get data-binding and partial-update behavior with web-native APIS.
The main argument of the article is that most people don't need React, not necessarily that they don't need AJAX or data binding.
Here's what you wrote: >> Too bad. The author addressed everything you said. You just didn't read past the sentence you quoted.
>> Nowhere does the piece imply that you should render every state change server-side. In fact, it goes on to show, with specific examples, of how you can get data-binding and partial-update behavior with web-native APIs. The argument is that most people don't need React, not that they don't need AJAX or data binding.
Here's a political rewrite (Keep in mind I'm not a native english speaker):
It seems that the author addressed your points later in the article. For instance, rather than rendering every state change on the server-side, it explains how you can get data-binding and partial-update behavior with web-native APIS.
The main argument of the article is that most people don't need React, not necessarily that they don't need AJAX or data binding.