5 ms·

Author here. A big part of why I'm saying "I don't need a VPS anymore", is because I'm also saying "I don't need dynamic sites anymore". I've been building dyna

by jaza 5y ago

Author here. A big part of why I'm saying "I don't need a VPS anymore", is because I'm also saying "I don't need dynamic sites anymore". I've been building dynamic sites for two decades (once upon a time "original LAMP stack" PHP + MySQL, more recently Python + PostgreSQL). I honestly never imagined that static sites could one day compete with that. But times have changed, and the JAMstack of 2022 has all the functionality you need. I've managed to convert all my old dynamic sites to be statically generated, without really compromising on bells and whistles. And the SaaS I'm now using is (almost) all free. As far as I'm concerned, I'm having my cake and eating it too.

cutler 5y ago
I think you're overplaying the "static" card. If you're using the JAMstack the static bit is only half of the equation. Need a contact form? Now you need a form-processing service and it's no longer static. If you're replacing old PHP + MySQL sites you'll need a lot more than a static site generator. "Mostly static" might be more accurate but then how long does that last? Clients typically want WordPress plus a ton of plugins. I don't see how JAMstack addresses that need. You say it's nearly 100% free but I just looked at Netlify's free tier and you're only allowed 100 form submissions per month after which they're $19 each. I don't think I would get a night's sleep with that hanging over my head.
- jaza 5y ago
  It's up to you when you think a traditional server back-end is still warranted, there are certainly still cases where it makes sense. But if all you need is a contact form, then I'd argue that it doesn't make sense! Yes, I agree, Netlify Forms is a rip-off, if you need more than the free limit of 100 submissions per month (which personally I don't, but of course many people do). But there are many other options for simple form handling, I'd recommend looking into them. And the JAMstack can compete quite well with WordPress and co these days, check out https://myclientwants.com/ https://myclientwants.com/
  - cutler 5y ago
    The thing is I only picked on forms off the top of my head. There's a ton of functionality in your average client site which I can't imagine JAMstack catering for without it costing a lot more than hosting it on a VPS. JAMstack seems to cater for the painting by numbers model of web development but that's only a small fraction of what clients need. The JAMstack equivalent of a typical WordPress site, I imagine, would have to pull-in a dozen external services costing a lot more than the VPS alternative. Netlify make a big deal about the low-cost scalability of the CDN factor in JAMstack but it's only low-cost when you don't use external services. It's quite the opposite, I've heard, once you've outgrown static and need a third party service for every new feature.
    - dgb23 5y ago
      That’s right. Plus you miss out on control, functionality, optimization, flexibility on the dev side and predictability and simplicity on the business side. It turns things upside down and for the type of work we do these are exactly the wrong tradeoffs.
    - yannikyeo 5y ago
      Agreed. I used to be on the JAMstack train, but when your dynamic needs grows, you site has more and more dependencies and some are vendor specific such as Netlify. Now I have simplified all to use just one web stack for simple static site, to crud site to rest api backend, running from container. Minimise vendor dependency so I can easily move around be it self hosted at home, vps, AWS, Cloud Run or whatever. Rather than creating more Netlify clone, I hope HN crowd can create Cloud Run clones that let you easily host a container, not just static pages.
  - dmitriid 5y ago
    > It's up to you when you think a traditional server back-end is still warranted All the cases outside of "oh, I dump my thoughts on the page once a year". Even for a blog in the modern world I would like: - automatic crossposting to Twitter and Facebook - automatic retrieval and reformatting of external content (because, for example, twitter embeds are very cumbersome, heavy and slow) - automatic retrieval of video and images from external sites (youtube, instagram, twitter etc.) because of link rot - delayed publishing - search - and a plethora of other things Yes, you can stitch togethe a bunch of "serverless" stuff for this, but you've just "replaced" the "traditional server backend" with a bunch of traditional server backends.
SPBS 5y ago
> A big part of why I'm saying "I don't need a VPS anymore", is because I'm also saying "I don't need dynamic sites anymore". I've been building dynamic sites for two decades (once upon a time "original LAMP stack" PHP + MySQL, more recently Python + PostgreSQL). I honestly never imagined that static sites could one day compete with that. But times have changed, and the JAMstack of 2022 has all the functionality you need. This IMO should have been the main point of the article, not VPSes. No one can argue that a maintaining a live website is better if a few HTML pages will do.
exodust 5y ago
> "I've managed to convert all my old dynamic sites to be statically generated, without really compromising on bells and whistles." In your linked article you say: "Anyway, site search is only a nice-to-have...and folks can just use Google with the site: operator instead" To me that sounds like a compromise. I'm out of my depth talking about SSG-powered sites because I've never developed them. My area is frontend design-dev, without the engineering stripes or desire for overly complicated builds. That's why PHP and the traditional dynamic sites work for me. PHP, javascript, templates and a good reliable CMS allows me - the non-engineer, to do really interesting things such as site search with lots of added unique tricks to make users happy when they search for things. Beyond my needs, the non-technical people I build sites for need to manage the content easily. That's where I scratch my head with the SSG offerings in that regard. Where the CMS is often the lowest priority, with bizarre suggestions and workarounds to fill the CMS void. For complex content-heavy sites with lots of products, forms, landing pages and categories, a good CMS is really important... and a general architecture that isn't scattered around big tech services IMHO.
- jaza 5y ago
  Author here. Re: search. It's not that site search is impossible, or even particularly hard, with a JAMstack site. It's just that I didn't consider it MVP for my personal site. I know how it can be done, and I'll implement it when I have time. Re: CMS. I know where you're coming from, I spent a good decade or so specialising in traditional CMSes / frameworks myself, mainly Drupal and Django. There are various answers to the CMS question for static sites - the ones that I'm most familiar with are https://forestry.io/ https://forestry.io/ and https://tina.io/ https://tina.io/ (and I've heard no end of buzz about <https://www.sanity.io/ https://www.sanity.io/>). Those solutions are solid, I wouldn't call them "bizarre suggestions and workarounds". And they're good enough for most needs, IMHO. But I haven't tried pitching them to clients yet.

by jaza 5y ago

cutler 5y ago

I think you're overplaying the "static" card. If you're using the JAMstack the static bit is only half of the equation. Need a contact form? Now you need a form-processing service and it's no longer static. If you're replacing old PHP + MySQL sites you'll need a lot more than a static site generator. "Mostly static" might be more accurate but then how long does that last? Clients typically want WordPress plus a ton of plugins. I don't see how JAMstack addresses that need. You say it's nearly 100% free but I just looked at Netlify's free tier and you're only allowed 100 form submissions per month after which they're $19 each. I don't think I would get a night's sleep with that hanging over my head.

jaza 5y ago
It's up to you when you think a traditional server back-end is still warranted, there are certainly still cases where it makes sense. But if all you need is a contact form, then I'd argue that it doesn't make sense! Yes, I agree, Netlify Forms is a rip-off, if you need more than the free limit of 100 submissions per month (which personally I don't, but of course many people do). But there are many other options for simple form handling, I'd recommend looking into them. And the JAMstack can compete quite well with WordPress and co these days, check out https://myclientwants.com/ https://myclientwants.com/
- cutler 5y ago
  The thing is I only picked on forms off the top of my head. There's a ton of functionality in your average client site which I can't imagine JAMstack catering for without it costing a lot more than hosting it on a VPS. JAMstack seems to cater for the painting by numbers model of web development but that's only a small fraction of what clients need. The JAMstack equivalent of a typical WordPress site, I imagine, would have to pull-in a dozen external services costing a lot more than the VPS alternative. Netlify make a big deal about the low-cost scalability of the CDN factor in JAMstack but it's only low-cost when you don't use external services. It's quite the opposite, I've heard, once you've outgrown static and need a third party service for every new feature.
  - dgb23 5y ago
    That’s right. Plus you miss out on control, functionality, optimization, flexibility on the dev side and predictability and simplicity on the business side. It turns things upside down and for the type of work we do these are exactly the wrong tradeoffs.
  - yannikyeo 5y ago
    Agreed. I used to be on the JAMstack train, but when your dynamic needs grows, you site has more and more dependencies and some are vendor specific such as Netlify. Now I have simplified all to use just one web stack for simple static site, to crud site to rest api backend, running from container. Minimise vendor dependency so I can easily move around be it self hosted at home, vps, AWS, Cloud Run or whatever. Rather than creating more Netlify clone, I hope HN crowd can create Cloud Run clones that let you easily host a container, not just static pages.
- dmitriid 5y ago
  > It's up to you when you think a traditional server back-end is still warranted All the cases outside of "oh, I dump my thoughts on the page once a year". Even for a blog in the modern world I would like: - automatic crossposting to Twitter and Facebook - automatic retrieval and reformatting of external content (because, for example, twitter embeds are very cumbersome, heavy and slow) - automatic retrieval of video and images from external sites (youtube, instagram, twitter etc.) because of link rot - delayed publishing - search - and a plethora of other things Yes, you can stitch togethe a bunch of "serverless" stuff for this, but you've just "replaced" the "traditional server backend" with a bunch of traditional server backends.

SPBS 5y ago

> A big part of why I'm saying "I don't need a VPS anymore", is because I'm also saying "I don't need dynamic sites anymore". I've been building dynamic sites for two decades (once upon a time "original LAMP stack" PHP + MySQL, more recently Python + PostgreSQL). I honestly never imagined that static sites could one day compete with that. But times have changed, and the JAMstack of 2022 has all the functionality you need. This IMO should have been the main point of the article, not VPSes. No one can argue that a maintaining a live website is better if a few HTML pages will do.

exodust 5y ago

> "I've managed to convert all my old dynamic sites to be statically generated, without really compromising on bells and whistles." In your linked article you say: "Anyway, site search is only a nice-to-have...and folks can just use Google with the site: operator instead" To me that sounds like a compromise. I'm out of my depth talking about SSG-powered sites because I've never developed them. My area is frontend design-dev, without the engineering stripes or desire for overly complicated builds. That's why PHP and the traditional dynamic sites work for me. PHP, javascript, templates and a good reliable CMS allows me - the non-engineer, to do really interesting things such as site search with lots of added unique tricks to make users happy when they search for things. Beyond my needs, the non-technical people I build sites for need to manage the content easily. That's where I scratch my head with the SSG offerings in that regard. Where the CMS is often the lowest priority, with bizarre suggestions and workarounds to fill the CMS void. For complex content-heavy sites with lots of products, forms, landing pages and categories, a good CMS is really important... and a general architecture that isn't scattered around big tech services IMHO.

jaza 5y ago
Author here. Re: search. It's not that site search is impossible, or even particularly hard, with a JAMstack site. It's just that I didn't consider it MVP for my personal site. I know how it can be done, and I'll implement it when I have time. Re: CMS. I know where you're coming from, I spent a good decade or so specialising in traditional CMSes / frameworks myself, mainly Drupal and Django. There are various answers to the CMS question for static sites - the ones that I'm most familiar with are https://forestry.io/ https://forestry.io/ and https://tina.io/ https://tina.io/ (and I've heard no end of buzz about <https://www.sanity.io/ https://www.sanity.io/>). Those solutions are solid, I wouldn't call them "bizarre suggestions and workarounds". And they're good enough for most needs, IMHO. But I haven't tried pitching them to clients yet.