4 ms·
I just switched to Netlify from GitHub Pages a little under two weeks ago. The process of setting up DNS and switching everything over was seamless, I'm very pl
by philipkiely 7y ago
I just switched to Netlify from GitHub Pages a little under two weeks ago. The process of setting up DNS and switching everything over was seamless, I'm very pleased with the site under the free plan. I was choosing between Netlify and AWS and chose Netlify due to simplicity and a better free tier, even though it costs a bit more (or theoretically would in the long run).
A bit of economics:
The free plan offers 300 minutes of build and 100 GB of bandwidth. To compare, AWS S3 offers 20,000 GET requests for free. Given my pages average about 1 megabyte (other stuff is served from third-party CDNs, which are free). Thus 1 GB of bandwidth is approximately 1000 page views. In other words, Netlify offers about 5X as many free page views per month as AWS. I'm under absolutely no danger of getting to 100K page views, in a good month I get a couple of thousand. However, let's assume that I start writing better content and more people read it, like more than 100,000 page views per month. In that case, Netlify overage costs 20 cents per GB, AWS costs 9 cents. Overall, "at scale" Netlify is about twice as expensive as AWS S3 for static sites, but it's better at modest scale.
- pm90 7y agoWhat made you leave gh pages?
- nojvek 7y agoAFAIAK GitHub pages require that the built files are stored in the repo. Netlify checks out the repo, runs the build command and then takes files from your dist directory. I’d love for GitHub pages to behave like this. A much simpler setup.
- pm90 7y agoWell, you can technically push the src changes to `master` branch, have a github action build + update a `deploy` branch and then have gh pages read from there.