6 ms·

Firebase can take over having to use server side cookies & site settings for each user. You can use an oAuth login and then sync their settings to the firebase

Firebase can take over having to use server side cookies & site settings for each user. You can use an oAuth login and then sync their settings to the firebase backend. That's how I've used it, with great success. Firebase makes it possible to make a fully-featured and complex website with pure HTML/CSS/JS and no big backend crap (looks at PHP/MySQL)

justin_vanw 13y ago
I'm not saying you can't get value out of it. If your website is very simple, or not very valuable, then use whatever gets it done nicely. However, if you are doing anything serious or valuable or even moderately complex, locking into a single vendor like this is a bad decision. You can go along fine, but sooner or later you will need to do something that is just not possible inside of the proprietary system. At that point, you are either going to have to jump ship and reimplement features (introducing regressions and wasting development time), or try to convince the vendor to make changes to enable you, or give up. You are handing over a lot of power to someone and in exchange paying them a lot of money. I'm not saying it's never a good decision, I'm saying if there were something my company depended on to function, I would think very hard before I chose a solution that permanently locked me into a single vendor.
- deleted 13y ago
  [deleted]
- ronaldx 13y ago
  Here's some violent agreement... I think this is a great product - if I am building a site, I want to concentrate on building features for that without first building technical bleeding-edge interaction from the ground up. Sooner or later I may want to do something with this that isn't possible in the proprietary system, yes (although that's not guaranteed at the starting point). If I get to that point with traction and money to invest, I probably would do exactly what you suggest, i.e. build a bespoke solution. And, in that case, since the Firebase system acts as a modular component, refactoring this solution might even be a better option than refactoring a messy roll-your-own solution.

justin_vanw 13y ago

I'm not saying you can't get value out of it. If your website is very simple, or not very valuable, then use whatever gets it done nicely. However, if you are doing anything serious or valuable or even moderately complex, locking into a single vendor like this is a bad decision. You can go along fine, but sooner or later you will need to do something that is just not possible inside of the proprietary system. At that point, you are either going to have to jump ship and reimplement features (introducing regressions and wasting development time), or try to convince the vendor to make changes to enable you, or give up. You are handing over a lot of power to someone and in exchange paying them a lot of money. I'm not saying it's never a good decision, I'm saying if there were something my company depended on to function, I would think very hard before I chose a solution that permanently locked me into a single vendor.

deleted 13y ago
[deleted]
ronaldx 13y ago
Here's some violent agreement... I think this is a great product - if I am building a site, I want to concentrate on building features for that without first building technical bleeding-edge interaction from the ground up. Sooner or later I may want to do something with this that isn't possible in the proprietary system, yes (although that's not guaranteed at the starting point). If I get to that point with traction and money to invest, I probably would do exactly what you suggest, i.e. build a bespoke solution. And, in that case, since the Firebase system acts as a modular component, refactoring this solution might even be a better option than refactoring a messy roll-your-own solution.