Live data from Hacker News

Show HN: CloudBoost – Open-Source Parse, Firebase and Algolia Combined into One

github.com

1–10 of 45 posts

Re: Show HN: CloudBoost – Open-Source Parse, Firebase and Algolia Combined into One

#2
Every link in the readme just points to the Docker installation. While I agree that making it runnable in Docker makes it runnable practically everywhere, but all the various links and "Run it on ..." buttons make it seems they are tailored for those clouds...

Re: Show HN: CloudBoost – Open-Source Parse, Firebase and Algolia Combined into One

#5
Algolia's pitch is "much better results than you'd get from the average open-source search tool", not "hosted ElasticSearch". How does CloudBoost stack up? What special sauce makes this an open-source Algolia and not an ElasticSearch wrapper?

Re: Show HN: CloudBoost – Open-Source Parse, Firebase and Algolia Combined into One

#8

On their website [1], they make it look like WhatsApp, Slack, and Instagram are all using their service, when in reality it's their own implementation of "similar" services. Seems fishy. [1] https://www.cloudboost.io/

While true, I think you're nit-picking. They've clearly put a ton of effort into the project (code, docs, website), why is there something fishy or malicious?

Re: Show HN: CloudBoost – Open-Source Parse, Firebase and Algolia Combined into One

#9

On their website [1], they make it look like WhatsApp, Slack, and Instagram are all using their service, when in reality it's their own implementation of "similar" services. Seems fishy. [1] https://www.cloudboost.io/

Yeah. They should probably just change the heading to something like 'See your favourite apps remade with Cloudboost'

Re: Show HN: CloudBoost – Open-Source Parse, Firebase and Algolia Combined into One

#10
CloudBoost looks amazing. I can tell they've put a ton of effort into the app, docs, and website.

This brings me to their problem... Pricing! Their pricing (https://www.cloudboost.io/pricing) makes little to zero sense. First it is priced too low, a sign of future problems ahead. Second, I think they've got the entire model wrong. They should charge for bundles of API calls and GB of storage. Pay for what you use like cloud providers.

An example of pricing I would implement might look like $10 per GB of storage and $0.15 every 1k of API calls.

Thus a smallish example application that uses 2 GB of storage and makes 500,000 API calls a month would pay $95 / month.

Post reply on HN