7 ms·

Thanks. This would be a lot more useful with a comparison of features or trade offs (e.g. how many resources do you get? does it suspend? what about databases?

Thanks. This would be a lot more useful with a comparison of features or trade offs (e.g. how many resources do you get? does it suspend? what about databases? etc.) instead of just the marketing taglines for each service.

culi 4y ago
This is my main problem with "awesome lists". I appreciate all the work that goes into cataloging things but without any exploration functionality (i.e. search, filter, sort), it's nearly useless. Tbh I don't recall a single time I really got something from an awesome list and I definitely haven't ever referred back to any of the lists I've saved/starred They might be fun for random exploration if you're killing time, but not really a tool
- granshaw 4y ago
  Right. Really what’s needed is one of those feature comparison sections with check marks or not as seen on landing pages. Put it in an airtable. Done.
- derefr 4y ago
  I don’t believe “awesome lists” are intended to make your decisions for you; rather, they’re intended as an input for a business analyst to gather that data (i.e. to thoroughly follow all the links, read entries for competitors in a solution-space, and build a feature-matrix themselves) and then make those decisions. In that use-case, they’ve been invaluable to me personally. Of course, you could get that same discoverability from language-package manager tool/website, if such systems ever allowed users (not developers!) to tag or otherwise multiply categorize packages, the way that e.g. Spotify allows users to create discoverable public playlists.
- TillE 4y ago
  They're far from useless, awesome-whatever is usually great for getting an overview of what kind of tools exist out there and what some popular choices are. If you're already aware of all that, sure, they don't add much information. Concise comparison is pretty difficult...except in cases like this.
  - culi 4y ago
    > Concise comparison is pretty difficult I don't know if I agree. I think maybe thorough comparison is difficult. But if you have a list of, for example, open-source alternatives to Postman, just including something like the amount of GitHub stars a project has can go a really long way. Especially if it becomes a list of 20+ projects and many of them have less than 10 stars or are no longer being developed The difference is basically the difference between a list and a table. Huge bonus if you use something like a spreadsheet software to make it interactive/sortable
funerr 4y ago
Shameless plug, I created my own awesome list that covers many of these providers - I curated products that developers would like: https://github.com/agamm/awesome-developer-first#deployment-hosting https://github.com/agamm/awesome-developer-first#deployment-... I might add the limits too - a cool idea.
buffalobuffalo 4y ago
Agreed. I am looking for a very specific use case. These lists don't really provide much insight into whether or not a service fits. For reference, my use case/requirements: - I want to be able to deploy dockerized apps to an AWS region. - I should be able to define different process types with different env vars/instance scale - I don't want to have to worry at all about underlying infrastructure - I want to be able to pipe the logs out to some other unified logging - I want to be able to deploy from a CI pipeline. So far nothing else I've seen besides heroku fits the bill.

culi 4y ago

This is my main problem with "awesome lists". I appreciate all the work that goes into cataloging things but without any exploration functionality (i.e. search, filter, sort), it's nearly useless. Tbh I don't recall a single time I really got something from an awesome list and I definitely haven't ever referred back to any of the lists I've saved/starred They might be fun for random exploration if you're killing time, but not really a tool

granshaw 4y ago
Right. Really what’s needed is one of those feature comparison sections with check marks or not as seen on landing pages. Put it in an airtable. Done.
derefr 4y ago
I don’t believe “awesome lists” are intended to make your decisions for you; rather, they’re intended as an input for a business analyst to gather that data (i.e. to thoroughly follow all the links, read entries for competitors in a solution-space, and build a feature-matrix themselves) and then make those decisions. In that use-case, they’ve been invaluable to me personally. Of course, you could get that same discoverability from language-package manager tool/website, if such systems ever allowed users (not developers!) to tag or otherwise multiply categorize packages, the way that e.g. Spotify allows users to create discoverable public playlists.
TillE 4y ago
They're far from useless, awesome-whatever is usually great for getting an overview of what kind of tools exist out there and what some popular choices are. If you're already aware of all that, sure, they don't add much information. Concise comparison is pretty difficult...except in cases like this.
- culi 4y ago
  > Concise comparison is pretty difficult I don't know if I agree. I think maybe thorough comparison is difficult. But if you have a list of, for example, open-source alternatives to Postman, just including something like the amount of GitHub stars a project has can go a really long way. Especially if it becomes a list of 20+ projects and many of them have less than 10 stars or are no longer being developed The difference is basically the difference between a list and a table. Huge bonus if you use something like a spreadsheet software to make it interactive/sortable

funerr 4y ago

Shameless plug, I created my own awesome list that covers many of these providers - I curated products that developers would like: https://github.com/agamm/awesome-developer-first#deployment-hosting https://github.com/agamm/awesome-developer-first#deployment-... I might add the limits too - a cool idea.

buffalobuffalo 4y ago

Agreed. I am looking for a very specific use case. These lists don't really provide much insight into whether or not a service fits. For reference, my use case/requirements: - I want to be able to deploy dockerized apps to an AWS region. - I should be able to define different process types with different env vars/instance scale - I don't want to have to worry at all about underlying infrastructure - I want to be able to pipe the logs out to some other unified logging - I want to be able to deploy from a CI pipeline. So far nothing else I've seen besides heroku fits the bill.