Live data from Hacker News

Viewing profile — nickpatrick

nickpatrick

HN member
Joined
Sun, Jul 04, 2010, 9:41 PM UTC
HN karma
96
Public activity
34 items

About nickpatrick

http://www.nicholasjohnpatrick.com https://radar.com

Recent public activity

  1. comment
    Comment #37673590

    Yep, I get it. Working on a self-serve pricing calculator. Reality is that enterprise convos do make sense at sufficient scale. If it does here, our inbox is open!

  2. comment
    Comment #37673516

    Out of curiosity, why do you think it's vastly superior?

  3. comment
    Comment #37672958

    Appreciate the feedback. We're working on showing the right level of detail at different zoom levels for the different map styles. cc @kocheez75

  4. comment
    Comment #37672918

    Should be showing a collapsible ⓘ button on very small screens. We'll take a look and fix.

  5. comment
    Comment #37672897

    We are big fans of Felt!

  6. comment
    Comment #37672895

    As someone who used to work at an ad tech company, I can tell you that we're very much not an ad tech company. In fact, we set out to build the opposite. More here: https://radar.c…

  7. comment
    Comment #37672874

    Would love to chat. Worth considering best solution given tradeoffs: Cost, coverage, customization options, enterprise-readiness

  8. comment
    Comment #37669921

    Our standard policy is that you can cache responses for up to 30 days: https://radar.com/documentation/maps/geocoding#caching

  9. comment
    Comment #37669751

    You can charge a lot when you're #1.

  10. comment
    Comment #37669744

    Still pretty good in Europe, but more of a gap. International coverage will be a priority in 2024.

  11. comment
    Comment #37669734

    Not familiar with this list, but I'm guessing overly aggressive blocking of location APIs. More on our approach here: https://radar.com/trust

  12. comment
    Comment #37669558

    Pricing page could def be clearer. Working on it! https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37668919

  13. comment
    Comment #37669476

    Pricing is per API call right now, but we're planning to add "per session" pricing in future.

  14. comment
    Comment #37669360

    Can you share more about what you're hoping to do?

  15. comment
    Comment #37669309

    That's a pretty aggressive list...

  16. comment
    Comment #37669295

    Google is the gold standard, but our coverage is quite good in the US. We incorporate a mix of open and commercial datasets both for POI and address data.

  17. comment
    Comment #37669120

    Old but good post on vector maps vs. raster maps from our friends at CARTO: https://carto.com/blog/raster-vs-vector-whats-the-difference...

  18. comment
    Comment #37669091

    Potentially! We're still big fans of Mapbox for highly styled maps. We've just found that Mapbox and Google are overkill for many of our customers.

  19. comment
    Comment #37669049

    Stay tuned...!?

  20. comment
    Comment #37668919

    A map load is what it sounds like, an API call is a geocoding/search/routing API call. Pricing starts at $0.50 per 1K for both. Pricing page could be clearer, we're working on it!

  21. comment
    Comment #37668890

    More details in the post, but Google starts at $7 per 1K map loads and $5 per 1K geocoding API requests, whereas Radar starts at $0.50 per 1K for both. We've roughly been helping o…

  22. comment
    Comment #37668827

    Radar CEO here. Welcome any questions or feedback!

  23. comment
    Comment #25445802

    If you're looking for a simple, polished, developer-friendly alternative, check out Radar ( https://radar.io ). Think Twilio/Braze/Amplitude/Segment/Radar vs. SNS/Pinpoint/EventBri…

  24. comment
    Comment #2574551

    Great read, David. Thanks for sharing. One thing that I'd be curious to learn that isn't covered in the write-up: How exactly did you learn all of this? You say "on the job," but c…

  25. comment
    Comment #2297700

    Cool idea. How accurate do you expect the figures to be? Might people whose apps are reviewed particularly slowly be more inclined to report review times, thereby skewing results?