4 ms·

Vercel forces migration of Next/Image in NextJS proceeds to charge for using it

10 points by flurly 5y ago

TechBro8615 5y ago
This is borderline ridiculous FUD. Vercel didn’t force any kind of migration. They introduced a new tool for optimizing images, which is not only entirely self-hostable, but even includes prebuilt configurations for services that compete with Vercel. [0] Absolutely no part of it requires you to use Vercel’s hosting or image optimization service. If you do choose to use their service, you can start with a free tier, which has clearly documented usage limits. I’m not sure why it’s surprising you’d be emailed when you exceed them. [0] https://nextjs.org/docs/basic-features/image-optimization#loader https://nextjs.org/docs/basic-features/image-optimization#lo...
- flurly 5y ago
  The problem I'm trying to highlight here is conflict of interest. They create one of the most popular JS frameworks - NextJS. They advocate for upgrading to the latest versions/features. But by using the latest version of their framework, you end up hitting a limit you previously didn't hit. It feels like the wrong approach for a company that purports to serve developers.
  - domano 5y ago
    But then just use their framework and not their hosting service, i do not understand the issue. I serve my homepage with Next.js on my own k3s cluster with no issues, image optimization and all.
    - deleted 5y ago
      [deleted]
  - TechBro8615 5y ago
    Maybe the conclusion here is that Vercel should increase the threshold of its free tier for the new image optimization service, if people with the same websites (and presumably usage profiles) are now exceeding that threshold. But the accusatory tone in the linked tweet (“disingenuous”) sounds, ironically, disingenuous. You’re ascribing a hostile motive to Vercel, but all the evidence suggests they are acting in good faith. If they were so desperate to funnel you into their paid tier of image optimization, why would they explicitly document how to use their software with competing services?

10 points by flurly 5y ago

This is borderline ridiculous FUD. Vercel didn’t force any kind of migration. They introduced a new tool for optimizing images, which is not only entirely self-hostable, but even includes prebuilt configurations for services that compete with Vercel. [0] Absolutely no part of it requires you to use Vercel’s hosting or image optimization service. If you do choose to use their service, you can start with a free tier, which has clearly documented usage limits. I’m not sure why it’s surprising you’d be emailed when you exceed them. [0] https://nextjs.org/docs/basic-features/image-optimization#loader https://nextjs.org/docs/basic-features/image-optimization#lo...

flurly 5y ago
The problem I'm trying to highlight here is conflict of interest. They create one of the most popular JS frameworks - NextJS. They advocate for upgrading to the latest versions/features. But by using the latest version of their framework, you end up hitting a limit you previously didn't hit. It feels like the wrong approach for a company that purports to serve developers.
- domano 5y ago
  But then just use their framework and not their hosting service, i do not understand the issue. I serve my homepage with Next.js on my own k3s cluster with no issues, image optimization and all.
  - deleted 5y ago
    [deleted]
- TechBro8615 5y ago
  Maybe the conclusion here is that Vercel should increase the threshold of its free tier for the new image optimization service, if people with the same websites (and presumably usage profiles) are now exceeding that threshold. But the accusatory tone in the linked tweet (“disingenuous”) sounds, ironically, disingenuous. You’re ascribing a hostile motive to Vercel, but all the evidence suggests they are acting in good faith. If they were so desperate to funnel you into their paid tier of image optimization, why would they explicitly document how to use their software with competing services?