4 ms·

I'd suggest preparing a comparison table on the home page, at least against open source competitors, to help prospects decide. You emphasize completeness (authz

by esafak 2y ago

I'd suggest preparing a comparison table on the home page, at least against open source competitors, to help prospects decide. You emphasize completeness (authz + authn), and simplicity here: The dominant player in this space is Auth0, who appeals to enterprises but lags behind in developer-friendliness and has strong vendor lock-in. A newer one is Clerk, which markets directly to devs, but is still entirely proprietary. Open-source solutions like Supabase Auth or Auth.js/NextAuth are only authN, and don't provide the rest of the toolchain. Your pricing seems multi-tenant friendly. What other differentiating factors can you think of?

n2d4 2y ago
Appreciate the feedback! We have the following in our GitHub README, which we should probably copy to our frontpage: > # How is this different from X? > > Ask yourself about X: > > - Is X open-source? > > - Is X developer-friendly, well-documented, and lets you get started in minutes? > > - Besides authentication, does X also do authorization and user management (see feature list below)? > > If you answered "no" to any of these questions, then that's how Stack Auth is different from X.
- esafak 2y ago
  If you want to be developer friendly, create examples for as many languages as you can, and include them in the documentation, and as GitHub repos. Don't say "it's REST, DIY!"
  - n2d4 2y ago
    Noted, thanks. We're focussing on Next.js frontends right now — which is fairly well-documented — I hope to get some Python & Golang examples in there by the end of the week.
- rudasn 2y ago
  I think a comparison table here would be better for you here, considering your target audience and all.
- vhfdbbvfdv 2y ago
  [dead]
- MrDarcy 2y ago
  How are you different than ZITADEL specifically? They’re open source (Apache 2.0), developer friendly (nice, documented API), and handles authorization and user management well.

by esafak 2y ago

n2d4 2y ago

Appreciate the feedback! We have the following in our GitHub README, which we should probably copy to our frontpage: > # How is this different from X? > > Ask yourself about X: > > - Is X open-source? > > - Is X developer-friendly, well-documented, and lets you get started in minutes? > > - Besides authentication, does X also do authorization and user management (see feature list below)? > > If you answered "no" to any of these questions, then that's how Stack Auth is different from X.

esafak 2y ago
If you want to be developer friendly, create examples for as many languages as you can, and include them in the documentation, and as GitHub repos. Don't say "it's REST, DIY!"
- n2d4 2y ago
  Noted, thanks. We're focussing on Next.js frontends right now — which is fairly well-documented — I hope to get some Python & Golang examples in there by the end of the week.
rudasn 2y ago
I think a comparison table here would be better for you here, considering your target audience and all.
vhfdbbvfdv 2y ago
[dead]
MrDarcy 2y ago
How are you different than ZITADEL specifically? They’re open source (Apache 2.0), developer friendly (nice, documented API), and handles authorization and user management well.