Live data from Hacker News

Surge – Static Web Publishing for Front-End Developers

surge.sh

51–60 of 80 posts

Re: Surge – Static Web Publishing for Front-End Developers

#51
post #37

Is there a difference between what Surge offers versus ngrok? (Genuinely curious, not trying to imply that "this has been done before" or shouldn't exist!)

I was under the impression that ngrok only provided tunnels, while surge only provides hosting/CDN.

Ah, yes that makes sense -- thanks!

Re: Surge – Static Web Publishing for Front-End Developers

#52
post #46

I mean, if you're doing a static site you can also use github pages with a simple push command. Is there some difference between surge and doing this that I'm not seeing?

I used to use GitHub Pages, but you can't have a custom domain that has SSL, so I switched to Surge like six months ago, and it works great. To be honest, though, if GitHub adds custom domains with SSL to pages, I'll probably switch back.

Have you considered Gitlab, which does advertise custom domains for which you can upload your own SSL certs? Even at the free plan level. I would switch to it if not for the fact that my site isn't dealing with any kind of sensitive stuff so I figured Github Pages with Cloudflare's SSL was enough, although I'm aware its not end-to-end.

Re: Surge – Static Web Publishing for Front-End Developers

#53

Nice service, but too expensive to be honest. My static websites (built with middleman) are hosted in Amazon S3 as a static website bucket and have a Cloudfront distribution in front of it. I use `middleman s3_sync` to deploy the build in one command and it takes care of everything, even Cloudfront invalidation. All for just a few pennies per month. Anyway, keep up the good work.

Hi, Brock from surge.sh here.

We are still figuring out our pricing. It kind of kills me to hear someone call surge too expensive. We worked hard to give surge a very legit free offering which is serving over 35k projects. Surge gives (currently) unlimited projects with custom domains. We charge $13/mo for that extra 1% which is custom SSL, basic auth, custom redirects.

Very open to suggestions if you have any. Would you prefer we have a small membership fee and open up all the features? What would you suggest is fair?

Re: Surge – Static Web Publishing for Front-End Developers

#54

I mean, if you're doing a static site you can also use github pages with a simple push command. Is there some difference between surge and doing this that I'm not seeing?

If you are properly preparing your assets for web distribution you really don't want those files in a git repo. it messes up your commit history and doesn't provide much value. I think gh-pages is fundamentally broken for this reason. IMHO its best to keep your source files in a git repo and publish your compiled assets to surge.

Re: Surge – Static Web Publishing for Front-End Developers

#55
post #53

Nice service, but too expensive to be honest. My static websites (built with middleman) are hosted in Amazon S3 as a static website bucket and have a Cloudfront distribution in front of it. I use `middleman s3_sync` to deploy the build in one command and it takes care of everything, even Cloudfront invalidation. All for just a few pennies per month. Anyway, keep up the good work.

Hi, Brock from surge.sh here. We are still figuring out our pricing. It kind of kills me to hear someone call surge too expensive. We worked hard to give surge a very legit free offering which is serving over 35k projects. Surge gives (currently) unlimited projects with custom domains. We charge $13/mo for that extra 1% which is custom SSL, basic auth, custom redirects. Very open to suggestions if you have any. Would…

It would be cool to see a $2/mo option for people that want to support the project (same features as the free tier).

Re: Surge – Static Web Publishing for Front-End Developers

#56
post #42

I don't work directly with Surge but the other developers where I'm at have found Surge to have too much downtime and we're moving off of it now. Maybe in the future they will have a more reliable service, but right now you'll definitely experience the growing pains of a new tool.

Was the downtime with the static website itself or the deployment tools?

static website

Re: Surge – Static Web Publishing for Front-End Developers

#57

Nice service, but too expensive to be honest. My static websites (built with middleman) are hosted in Amazon S3 as a static website bucket and have a Cloudfront distribution in front of it. I use `middleman s3_sync` to deploy the build in one command and it takes care of everything, even Cloudfront invalidation. All for just a few pennies per month. Anyway, keep up the good work.

I wouldn't be too quick to say it's too expensive. My set up is not dissimilar to your own. I'm comfortable working on the command line, using s3cmd to sync the site, modifying bucket policies, etc. Once you know those things - or if you enjoy learning them - it's all pretty trivial, but if you don't... well don't underestimate the hassle for someone who doesn't know this stuff. I'd think it a waste to pay $13/mo for…

For low volume projects it is clearly too expensive.

I prefer a volume based pricing model like 5apps is offering it: https://5apps.com/deploy/plans

Re: Surge – Static Web Publishing for Front-End Developers

#58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I wouldn't be too quick to say it's too expensive. My set up is not dissimilar to your own. I'm comfortable working on the command line, using s3cmd to sync the site, modifying bucket policies, etc. Once you know those things - or if you enjoy learning them - it's all pretty trivial, but if you don't... well don't underestimate the hassle for someone who doesn't know this stuff. I'd think it a waste to pay $13/mo for…

Also remember that's 13 bucks to get custom SSL, redirects, etc. If you have simple pages w/o the need of https, it costs nothing.

I think that SSL is just for surge.sh subdomains. I didn't see anything about lets-encrypt SSL on custom domains.

Re: Surge – Static Web Publishing for Front-End Developers

#59
post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I used to use GitHub Pages, but you can't have a custom domain that has SSL, so I switched to Surge like six months ago, and it works great. To be honest, though, if GitHub adds custom domains with SSL to pages, I'll probably switch back.

Have you considered Gitlab, which does advertise custom domains for which you can upload your own SSL certs? Even at the free plan level. I would switch to it if not for the fact that my site isn't dealing with any kind of sensitive stuff so I figured Github Pages with Cloudflare's SSL was enough, although I'm aware its not end-to-end.

I couldn't get CloudFlare's SSL to work with GitHub Pages when I tried it because of some DNS issues. Do you have that working?

Re: Surge – Static Web Publishing for Front-End Developers

#60

Nice service, but too expensive to be honest. My static websites (built with middleman) are hosted in Amazon S3 as a static website bucket and have a Cloudfront distribution in front of it. I use `middleman s3_sync` to deploy the build in one command and it takes care of everything, even Cloudfront invalidation. All for just a few pennies per month. Anyway, keep up the good work.

Agree, Middleman + Middleman s3_sync is such an easy set up and deploy... Middleman project doesn't get enough love I think...

I gave up on Middleman when I couldn't get anyone in various Ruby mailing lists and IRC channels to advise me how to stop Middleman deleting directories which aren't mirrored in the src directory. Jekyll has the keep_files: [] config option.
Post reply on HN