7 ms·

Firebase smell the Google Maps model with its “free” for a long time plan, before turning up the price when most of the market is used to the product and are to

Firebase smell the Google Maps model with its “free” for a long time plan, before turning up the price when most of the market is used to the product and are to deeply locked to the API.

mav3rick 6y ago
Why shouldn't they charge for a great product ? When Google charges it's a problem when they don't charge it's a problem.
- codegladiator 6y ago
  > Why shouldn't they charge for a great product ? They should charge from the beginning. > When Google charges it's a problem Where is that ? It's a problem when it's abrupt.
  - tifadg1 6y ago
    It's easy taking the high road when you're not the one actually doing something. As a business, if you're getting something for free, assume someone else is subsidising you, as there's no such thing as free lunch.
    - codegladiator 6y ago
      Not sure what is the point you are trying to make. What high road did I take ? > if you're getting something for free, assume someone else is subsidising you, as there's no such thing as free lunch And how does this matter to the commend that OP made which I was replying to ?
- nicoburns 6y ago
  No, when they tout the product as free or cheap, and then only later up the pricing by 10x, once people have built their business around the older pricing model. That's a problem.
  - mav3rick 6y ago
    If you don't want to pay then roll your own solution or use this startup
    - deleted 6y ago
      [deleted]
  - bmikaili 6y ago
    God forbid someone wants to get money for their product
    - sauwan 6y ago
      No one's saying they shouldn't. If the current business model isn't sustainable, then it's a predatory lock-in scheme to monopolize the market and then take advantage of the people who've become dependant on your product.
      - Tostino 6y ago
        Couldn't agree more. If major price changes are required to make the product work well after customers have been "enticed" in with a reasonable cost, it is underhanded to say the least.
        sparkie 6y ago
        It's more than just "entice". Google has crippled apps which don't use FCM since Oreo by limiting their ability to run alternatives which have a blocking socket waiting for new information. Only choice is to use FCM or lose essential functionality.
        mav3rick 6y ago
        FCM is part of the core API now. They don't want other shitty solutions constantly waking the device up and eating your battery. That is why only FCM i.e. a trusted source is white listed. It's easy to peddle half truths hear just give it an anti Google color and carry your pitch forks.
- sparkie 6y ago
  The problem is they've forced people to use the product by hindering their ability to run background services without it. Since Oreo, background services are turned to idle unless they receive high priority push notifications from FCM.
  - mav3rick 6y ago
    And this is done to tackle the horrendous battery issues.
- Chris2048 6y ago
  > when they don't charge it's a problem only if it means they'll kill the service, or "you're the product"-ize its users
Red_Leaves_Flyy 6y ago
Just this year, Google/firebase has dropped their flat monthly fee plan which increased the spark plans limits. Just this week cloud functions have been removed from the free spark plan, which will break a lot of peoples apps. These decisions are alienating to me. I've been working on migrating my heroku mern stack app to firebase but now I'm having serious second thoughts. I was initially attracted by the free and flat fee plans. I won't ever sign up for a service that demands absolute liability without any way to put hard limits on expense. Without a way to put an absolute maximum limit on expenses, whether $10k or 0.01, I'll never upgrade my account on firebase. I've spent this week reviewing some alternatives and standing up everything myself on a vps is more attractive then losing sleep over the possibility of my crappy code bankrupting me on firebase.
- pgt 6y ago
  Wow, did not know they dropped cloud functions from the free tier, but don't you get a free usage tier as long as you provide a credit card?
  - puf 6y ago
    firebaser here Both are indeed correct: you must now provide a credit card to use Cloud Functions, and you do get a free tier on the Blaze plan. In fact, the Blaze plan comes with a free tier that is bigger than the limit of the free plan was, but you can no longer use it without entering a credit card. This change came while adding support for newer node.js versions. Cloud Functions now uses Cloud Build to create its containers, and while Cloud Build does offer a free tier, you'll have to enter a credit card to use it.

Firebase smell the Google Maps model with its “free” for a long time plan, before turning up the price when most of the market is used to the product and are to deeply locked to the API.

mav3rick 6y ago

Why shouldn't they charge for a great product ? When Google charges it's a problem when they don't charge it's a problem.

codegladiator 6y ago
> Why shouldn't they charge for a great product ? They should charge from the beginning. > When Google charges it's a problem Where is that ? It's a problem when it's abrupt.
- tifadg1 6y ago
  It's easy taking the high road when you're not the one actually doing something. As a business, if you're getting something for free, assume someone else is subsidising you, as there's no such thing as free lunch.
  - codegladiator 6y ago
    Not sure what is the point you are trying to make. What high road did I take ? > if you're getting something for free, assume someone else is subsidising you, as there's no such thing as free lunch And how does this matter to the commend that OP made which I was replying to ?
nicoburns 6y ago
No, when they tout the product as free or cheap, and then only later up the pricing by 10x, once people have built their business around the older pricing model. That's a problem.
- mav3rick 6y ago
  If you don't want to pay then roll your own solution or use this startup
  - deleted 6y ago
    [deleted]
- bmikaili 6y ago
  God forbid someone wants to get money for their product
  - sauwan 6y ago
    No one's saying they shouldn't. If the current business model isn't sustainable, then it's a predatory lock-in scheme to monopolize the market and then take advantage of the people who've become dependant on your product.
    - Tostino 6y ago
      Couldn't agree more. If major price changes are required to make the product work well after customers have been "enticed" in with a reasonable cost, it is underhanded to say the least.
      - sparkie 6y ago
        It's more than just "entice". Google has crippled apps which don't use FCM since Oreo by limiting their ability to run alternatives which have a blocking socket waiting for new information. Only choice is to use FCM or lose essential functionality.
        mav3rick 6y ago
        FCM is part of the core API now. They don't want other shitty solutions constantly waking the device up and eating your battery. That is why only FCM i.e. a trusted source is white listed. It's easy to peddle half truths hear just give it an anti Google color and carry your pitch forks.
sparkie 6y ago
The problem is they've forced people to use the product by hindering their ability to run background services without it. Since Oreo, background services are turned to idle unless they receive high priority push notifications from FCM.
- mav3rick 6y ago
  And this is done to tackle the horrendous battery issues.
Chris2048 6y ago
> when they don't charge it's a problem only if it means they'll kill the service, or "you're the product"-ize its users

Red_Leaves_Flyy 6y ago

Just this year, Google/firebase has dropped their flat monthly fee plan which increased the spark plans limits. Just this week cloud functions have been removed from the free spark plan, which will break a lot of peoples apps. These decisions are alienating to me. I've been working on migrating my heroku mern stack app to firebase but now I'm having serious second thoughts. I was initially attracted by the free and flat fee plans. I won't ever sign up for a service that demands absolute liability without any way to put hard limits on expense. Without a way to put an absolute maximum limit on expenses, whether $10k or 0.01, I'll never upgrade my account on firebase. I've spent this week reviewing some alternatives and standing up everything myself on a vps is more attractive then losing sleep over the possibility of my crappy code bankrupting me on firebase.

pgt 6y ago
Wow, did not know they dropped cloud functions from the free tier, but don't you get a free usage tier as long as you provide a credit card?
- puf 6y ago
  firebaser here Both are indeed correct: you must now provide a credit card to use Cloud Functions, and you do get a free tier on the Blaze plan. In fact, the Blaze plan comes with a free tier that is bigger than the limit of the free plan was, but you can no longer use it without entering a credit card. This change came while adding support for newer node.js versions. Cloud Functions now uses Cloud Build to create its containers, and while Cloud Build does offer a free tier, you'll have to enter a credit card to use it.