News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Netlify raises $30M to replace webservers with Applicatio... by perplamps on Tuesday October 09, 2018 @01:11PM (#18177765)
I use Firebase hosting for a static site that gets between 100-400gb of traffic per month, and it works out a bit cheaper than Netlify ($15-$50/m vs. flat $45/m). I hardly ever use their web interface and just deal with their one line CLI.

My biggest concern with Firebase is if it's still going to be around in a year or two. That's why I'd be reluctant to use it for DB and auth stuff. I narrowly avoided jumping into Parse back in the day before that was shuttered so I'm wary.

Re:Netlify raises $30M to replace webservers with Applicatio... by xrd on Tuesday October 09, 2018 @03:08PM (#18178915)
It seems like more and more services are being moved under the Firebase umbrella (Crashlytics for example), signalling Google is committed long term to Firebase. It is a considerable form of cloud lock-in if you get your data into Firebase (firestore) and a competitive advantage over AWS, so there is good reason to believe this is long term strategy as well.
Re:Netlify raises $30M to replace webservers with Applicatio... by tinyvm on Tuesday October 09, 2018 @01:37PM (#18178055)
> My biggest concern with Firebase is if it's still going to be around in a year or two

That's interesting , why Firebase would go away ?

It's just back end on top of GCloud.

Actually , everytime you do something in Firebase , it create a ressources in your GCloud account.

Firebase may not be super popular for SaaS but for Mobile , it's the king and by far , you can use it with no doubt.

Re:Netlify raises $30M to replace webservers with Applicatio... by thealfreds on Tuesday October 09, 2018 @02:42PM (#18178681)
I think most of the concern comes from Google shutting down services and apis pretty regularly. I wouldn't use it for large projects or long term projects because of how differently you need to write things to effectively work with it.