React consulting and front-end architecture

Decided against requirements rather than by default. Server rendering helps first paint and search visibility; client rendering suits applications behind a login where neither matters much. Most applications need a considered mix, and the mistake is inheriting the framework's default without asking.

Start by separating server state from client state — they have different requirements and conflating them is the root of most state complexity we see. Server state wants caching and invalidation; client state is usually small enough that elaborate tooling is unnecessary.

Bundle size and unnecessary re-rendering, measured on representative devices and networks rather than on a developer machine. That last point matters more than it sounds: the development environment is the least representative one available, particularly for users on older devices.

Probably not. They solve a real problem — independent deployment by separate teams — at substantial cost in complexity and user experience consistency. They are adopted considerably more often than that problem is actually present.

Through the component library, so accessibility is built once rather than per screen, combined with automated checks in the pipeline and manual assessment for what automation cannot catch. Retrofitting accessibility into a delivered application is materially more expensive than building it in.

Yes, applied throughout. Partial adoption is the trap: it gives an impression of safety the type checker cannot actually provide, because it cannot reason about the untyped portions and reports silence rather than uncertainty.

Usually yes, screen by screen behind consistent routing and a shared design language. That is nearly always preferable to a cutover: it delivers value earlier and each increment can be assessed rather than the whole thing being judged at the end.

Only as a user experience convenience. Hiding a control does not restrict the endpoint behind it, and authorisation implemented only in the client is not authorisation. The server must enforce it independently, treating the client as untrusted.

First ask whether the API shape is right — a screen requiring six round trips usually reflects endpoints designed for a different consumer. Where the API can change, that is the larger win. Where it cannot, caching and request coalescing help materially.

Because client-side failures are invisible without deliberate reporting. An application broken for a particular browser or device can fail that way for weeks with no signal at all, which is why error reporting with enough context to reproduce is worth setting up early.

Yes, through software development, and we also take architecture and review engagements where your team builds and we assess rendering strategy, state design and accessibility.