4 ms·

Hi there, for sure! I'll put these companies in buckets: https://render.com/ https://render.com/ These folks are a production solution and have added support f

Hi there, for sure! I'll put these companies in buckets: https://render.com/ https://render.com/ These folks are a production solution and have added support for review apps. All that happens is a new deploy of the production app on every PR. There's no support for spinning up arbitrary commits, caching, etc.. Further, its not free. https://vercel.com/ https://vercel.com/, https://www.netlify.com/ https://www.netlify.com/ Only supports frontend (and maybe serverless?) https://www.releaseapp.io/ https://www.releaseapp.io/, https://getdockup.com/ https://getdockup.com/ These are both more direct competitors. Dockup is no longer around I believe. Wrt/ release we have different outlooks on pricing, as they charge a large initial fee. The product itself is similar, however. And lastly, Heroku was discussed in threads below, but the general idea is that if you're already on Heroku, using review apps makes a lot of sense! With that being said, they don't support the features I mentioned above such as, restarting runs, comparing commits, caching, etc.. Let me know your thoughts, happy to keep the conversation going!

anurag 6y ago
(Render founder) * Render PR previews have built-in caching. * Many of our customers use Preview Environments (currently in early access). For every PR, Render automatically spins up a complete testing environment including static sites, servers and databases that can be seeded with a hook. It's similar to Heroku's Review Apps, but a fraction of the cost. * Render's Preview Environments are free for static sites and prorated by the second for servers and databases. Regarding pricing: we charge for actual usage (vs. a per-seat model) because previews (and consequently our own costs) rarely scale linearly with developer count. More generally, it's great to see more activity in the space because it's a validation of our own product strategy, and there is obviously room for multiple players.
- podoman 6y ago
  Sorry if my assumptions were incorrect in the above post; and likewise, big fans of Render's offerings :) .
  - anurag 6y ago
    No worries and thanks! Reploy looks great. It's especially useful for teams on AWS/GCP who want to run this in their own VPC. Per-seat pricing makes a lot of sense for that model.
    - podoman 6y ago
      Thanks @anurag, we should get connected at some point, just shot you a message :) .

anurag 6y ago

(Render founder) * Render PR previews have built-in caching. * Many of our customers use Preview Environments (currently in early access). For every PR, Render automatically spins up a complete testing environment including static sites, servers and databases that can be seeded with a hook. It's similar to Heroku's Review Apps, but a fraction of the cost. * Render's Preview Environments are free for static sites and prorated by the second for servers and databases. Regarding pricing: we charge for actual usage (vs. a per-seat model) because previews (and consequently our own costs) rarely scale linearly with developer count. More generally, it's great to see more activity in the space because it's a validation of our own product strategy, and there is obviously room for multiple players.

podoman 6y ago
Sorry if my assumptions were incorrect in the above post; and likewise, big fans of Render's offerings :) .
- anurag 6y ago
  No worries and thanks! Reploy looks great. It's especially useful for teams on AWS/GCP who want to run this in their own VPC. Per-seat pricing makes a lot of sense for that model.
  - podoman 6y ago
    Thanks @anurag, we should get connected at some point, just shot you a message :) .