In SOME cases they framework in question was fine in its original form for in-house use, but the moment it is made public it gets shoved into EVERY project regardless of if it is correct or not, and that's where more often than not things go bits up face down.
Larger established companies can also often afford to tell large swaths of users to *** off or staff their IT departments with fresh out of college mouth breathers they plan on firing in two years to bring in a whole new crowd of gullible fresh faces. This often means the people working on projects are in fact unqualified to do so, just as the people HIRING them are equally unqualified -- such companies often succeed with new projects by coasting on their existing name, blind luck, and not being under the rules and restrictions sites like banking, healthcare, public utilities, and governments are required to conform with.
In a lot of these cases taking it public and open source is more marketing stunt than an interest in helping any "social movement" -- they recognize the "rah rah fight the power" mentality of the die hard FLOSS zealots and realize how easy it is to herd them around like the sheep they are.
But really at the end of the day never underestimate the power of -- to borrow from Eisenhower -- apathy, ignorance, and wishful thinking.
A situation only exacerbated when middle-management doesn't know enough to make rational choices about what tools to use, and just shove down production coder's throats whatever hot trendy bullshit they last read about in Forbes.
Which as I'm always saying:
Taking tech advice from the pages of Forbes is like taking financial advice from the pages of Popular Mechanics.
JS Frameworks at not a no-go, who told you that?
Like any extra layer you should always consider whether you actually need a framework since it adds another layer of moving parts to your app, this means more code which means more to maintain, more that can potentially break, and more that needs to be sent to the client and executed (ie, worse performance).
Your job as a developer (and architect?) is to weigh the benefits that framework brings to your project, against these cons and figure out whether frameworks are no-go.
There is of course a cost to add a framework to your stack, but developers are pretty expensive as well and the point of the framework would usually be to save developer time.
Who said that? I think what you mean is, being framework independent, hence being able to do things in vanilla JS. The reason why I love Node or React is coz they force you to write raw JS, making you more flexible and through.
Now, React does some crazy ass diffing to make your view rendering run like a Ferrari, do you think you will be able to implement that in a day or two? Well you could if you had a team of 500 top notch coders and lots of money. But you don't so. So you use frameworks to ease up your task but at the same time tip toe around them if you think you can do things without them.
If JS frameworks are a no-go
...are they? You probably need to expand on why they're no go.
Hugo Mota
Code Hero
"JS frameworks are a no-go" ~Sounds like you've been reading some random guy's angry comment in a social network xD