7 ms·
IME most small software companies could be run off SQLite, a $5 linux VPS, vanilla JS, and a single line deploy script. (Pieter Levels seems like the master at
by LAC-Tech 5y ago
IME most small software companies could be run off SQLite, a $5 linux VPS, vanilla JS, and a single line deploy script. (Pieter Levels seems like the master at this)
I'd never bother suggesting it though:
- no one likes being told they're small when they think they're big
- it's bad for devs careers (Resume-Driven Development)
- as TFA points out - it's not what FAANG are doing so I'd lack legitimacy
- ehnto 5y agoI agree, except as I am not in the VC rat race I am more than happy to suggest people keep it simple.
- LAC-Tech 5y agoNeither am I - but all my reasons still apply. Try getting a job as a dev with vanilla JS and SQLite skills, as opposed to React and Microservice skills. What a business needs on a technical level doesn't matter when it comes to finding jobs.
- bgroat 5y agoI'm literally running 5 sites and $40k MRR on a $5 linode
- devoutsalsa 5y agoI love hearing stuff like this. What are you using for your database(s)?
- bgroat 5y agoMySQL - just checked. I would've sworn it was postgres. Just shows how much attention I pay to anything that isn't business logic
- logankeenan 5y agoThat’s awesome! Do you mind sharing about your tech stack or how you deploy?
- bgroat 5y agoI have a linode vps and easyengine When I want to create a new site I ssh in and type: sudo ee site create yourdomain.com --wp --letsencrypt And I have a deployed wordpress site and ssl certificate.
- porker 5y agoWow! What kind of sites are these to generate $40k MRR and fit on a $5 linode? I can think of one or the other but not put both together
- bgroat 5y agoedited for formatting "Sweaty Startups" - Lawn work - Accounting/Bookkeeping - Power washing - House cleaning And a single content site monetized by affiliate/ads
- TameAntelope 5y agoIt'd be a nightmare to support for anything more than trivially simple, though.
- trasz 5y agoQuite the opposite: the simpler the stack is, the easier to debug it is; also fewer moving parts means fewer things that break.
- TameAntelope 5y agoI disagree; you add complexity to a stack for a reason, usually to provide functionality that would be difficult to reproduce otherwise. Hand-building a reactive (lowercase r) table with sorting, filtering, etc. that's performant at large data volumes to keep your stack "simple", would be a nightmare to maintain and wouldn't allow other developers to bring prior experience with them when they later have to maintain that code.
- trasz 5y agoI agree, but what you are describing is a different thing: it's reinventing the wheel, not avoiding additional complexity. Avoiding additional complexity would be not having that reactive table. (And that of course would probably result in worse user experience, so it's really not a good example of what I've meant.)
- TameAntelope 5y ago> SQLite, a $5 linux VPS, vanilla JS, and a single line deploy script. This environment would necessitate "reinventing the wheel but so much worse" for anything other than the absolute most trivial applications.
- trasz 5y agoNot at all - it’s way simpler to set up than anything involving kubernetes, virtualization, or containers, and incomparably easier to fix when it breaks.
- urthor 5y agoStrongly disagree about it being (successful) resume driven development mostly. Most developer's resumes would be vastly enhanced by delivering a lean, technically successful product to end users, or 5. A lot of developers think playing with cool technology makes them better developers for some reason. Which isn't true. What makes them better developers is knowing what that technology does, and choosing the appropriate solution. And building consensus, managing personalities and driving execution. By being a reliable, high quality human being. Which is very different to knowing how to operate the API for that solution.
- MattGaiser 5y agoYeah, that is not what recruiters seem to care about. Nor what is tested in interviews.
- lumost 5y ago50/50 It's what employers look for in Senior Engineers, but junior engineers are often hired on pure tech. Historically there was a high amount of BS where people would take credit for deliveries that they were only tangentially a part of, or get ridiculously lucky on their first big project. It's next to impossible to hold an engineering team together to even KTLO if you don't have some project which grow's their careers.
- ju-st 5y agoThe number one requirement for Senior Engineers is their extensive experience with the company's tech stack. At least that is what is written in job ads outside of FAANG. You're probably not passing the HR stage when you have experience in Java but the company is looking for a senior .NET developer.
- urthor 5y agoIs this unironically true? Couldn't you... just fib? And learn it in a weekend?
- 5y ago
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]