4 ms·
Conspicuously missing for me from the graphs is anything indicating revenue. It's easy enough to get users if you give them free stuff. But a startup database c
by wpietri 4y ago
Conspicuously missing for me from the graphs is anything indicating revenue. It's easy enough to get users if you give them free stuff. But a startup database company has an inherent weakness. Given how foundational databases are to a lot of projects, it's the technology choice where people are most inclined to pick safe, boring choices. I'm sure they're getting people to try it out, but how many of them are putting major things on it?
- virgildotcodes 4y agoIf I’m not mistaken, one of the value propositions here is that it’s fundamentally Postgres, which should tick the boxes of safe and boring, no?
- wpietri 4y agoIf it's that boring, then why use it? Postgres is easy enough to install and there are plenty of reliable, profitable vendors providing it as a service. Presumably among their add-ons are features compelling enough to sign up to pay for ongoing service fees. But then what happens to the apps that depend on them if the company goes dark? We could well be entering the sort of extended recession that results in a venture capital drought.
- virgildotcodes 4y agoI mean, the thing that got me to try Supabase was that they had the most generous free tier for Postgres that I could find, didn’t even care about their other features.
- wpietri 4y agoThat makes sense to me. And you you paying them money now?
- virgildotcodes 4y agoNot yet, I haven't exceeded the free tier on the personal projects I'm testing with them so far.
- liuliu 4y agoI don't know. Open-source for simple things such as how to talk to a database is overly crowded. It is not as simple as "have a free product and people will come" any more which may be true 10 years ago. All I am saying: it took a lot of marketing to get yourself out there even if you give it for free nowadays.