Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Netlify raises $30M to replace webservers with Application Delivery Network

netlify.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 187 posts

Re: Netlify raises $30M to replace webservers with Application Delivery Network

#121

Post by andrei_says_ »

matt2000 wrote: post #116

I don't quite get this. I'm a long time Heroku user and this seems to be much more limited and not much better in any dimension, why is this so popular? This is an honest question, I just don't quite get why there's so much excitement in the comments. Thanks!

Many brochureware websites can be deployed as static sites.

There are many sophisticated static site generators which allow creating and maintaining large complex sites.

There are static site generator CMS apps which provide viable front-ends so that non-technical people can manage content. See netlify CMS.

All content is kept in git with all benefits derived from it.

Netlify hosting is free, simple to set up, secure by default, and provides lightning fast access in a “set it and forget it” manner.

To update your site, push to your github/gitlab/bitbucket repo. To create a preview of changes, push to a branch.

Form processing, logins etc. are inexpensive easy to set up add-ons.

Static websites are a magnitude faster, less hack-able and worry-free.

It’s a really sweet spot.

Heroku could be used for this but the free tier is limited.

Re: Netlify raises $30M to replace webservers with Application Delivery Network

#123

Post by bobfunk »

breckuh wrote: post #114
bobfunk wrote: post #95

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Lots of people use Netlify with GitLab as well. Some using our connection to GitLab and some pushing from GitLab's CI to Netlify via CLI.

I just built a test site with Netlify + GitLab. Why must I give it full access to all of my GitLab repositories? I just want to deploy 1 repo. Seems like that opens up unnecessary possibilities for a security breach.

It's the only option with the current OAuth model, however, we only use the token generated in your web browser, and talk directly to GitLab's API from there. We use the token to add a deploy key and a webhook to the specific repository we're linking to, and after that it's discarded. That way there's no long lived token stored on our end that has access to your whole account.

Re: Netlify raises $30M to replace webservers with Application Delivery Network

#124

Post by avip »

pixelmonkey wrote: post #15

May not be widely known, but a startup named Divshot launched what feels to me now like an identical service to Netlify, just a few years earlier. Existed ~2012-2015. They were acquired by Google and their product was converted into Firebase Hosting. I haven't tried it, though: https://firebase.google.com/docs/hosting/

Firebase is just awesome. I have deployed several minor apps on the platform. With out-of-the-box auth management and the db, I can have a static client-side only app that is relatively featured. I used to actually "code server side" to manage data, and that seems so redundant now with firebase. Thanks!

Re: Netlify raises $30M to replace webservers with Application Delivery Network

#125

Post by seanwilson »

matt2000 wrote: post #116

I don't quite get this. I'm a long time Heroku user and this seems to be much more limited and not much better in any dimension, why is this so popular? This is an honest question, I just don't quite get why there's so much excitement in the comments. Thanks!

Compared to hosting a static site on Heroku, Netlify deal with the CDN setup, cache invalidation on deploys and efficient delivery of static assets, with minimal configuration and a generous free tier. Heroku is much more flexible but you have more to configure yourself.

Ease of use vs flexibility.

Right now, I push for static site solutions over dynamic ones where possible because hosting is an order of magnitude simpler and there's way less that can go wrong.

Re: Netlify raises $30M to replace webservers with Application Delivery Network

#126

Post by breckuh »

bobfunk wrote: post #123
breckuh wrote: post #114

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I just built a test site with Netlify + GitLab. Why must I give it full access to all of my GitLab repositories? I just want to deploy 1 repo. Seems like that opens up unnecessary possibilities for a security breach.

It's the only option with the current OAuth model, however, we only use the token generated in your web browser, and talk directly to GitLab's API from there. We use the token to add a deploy key and a webhook to the specific repository we're linking to, and after that it's discarded. That way there's no long lived token stored on our end that has access to your whole account.

Awesome. Great workaround. Thanks!

Re: Netlify raises $30M to replace webservers with Application Delivery Network

#128

Post by theNextEpisode »

manigandham wrote: post #115
fvdessen wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The advantage is that the resulting website being just static pages will be much faster and secure that your hosted wordpress. And compared to wix etc, you have a lot more control on the appearance and structure of your website, because you can use wathever static website builder you choose

How is it more secure when you're still accessing an API? Wordpress itself might not be the best product but other fully-hosted services are all the same, whether they render the site or just give you an API. A CDN is equally fast when the content is cached, and if you're building the entire site as static pages then it's not really a dynamic site in the first place and can also be done with HTML or markdown in the s…

Good luck getting content editors to commit code to a repo or in markdowns. The contentful + netlify setup is really elegant.

Re: Netlify raises $30M to replace webservers with Application Delivery Network

#129

Post by _fool »

drawkbox wrote: post #120
cupar wrote: post #119

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They can be found in the TOS (see Quota & Limits section) https://www.netlify.com/tos/

Thanks, strange it is in the ToS. For paid accounts: - Network bandwidth: 1TB/month - Soft - Storage: 1TB - Soft - API requests: 500 requests/minute, 3 deploys/minute* - Hard For free accounts: - Network Bandwidth: 100GB/month - Soft - Storage: 100GB - Soft - API requests: 500 requests/minute, 3 deploys/minute* - Hard I wonder if they do overages, or just a hard cut-off, no mention. They probably nudge users that go…

I work for netlify, and yes, we ask you to upgrade, don't just turn you off if you go over.

Re: Netlify raises $30M to replace webservers with Application Delivery Network

#130

Post by _fool »

philsnow wrote: post #63

Does Netlify support 2FA for paid tiers? Their settings page is really clear about some features being available in certain plans (and btw I love this, it's really clear and it's not very aggressive of an upsell / not obnoxious), but there is no such callout for 2FA. This is one critical feature that github pages has over Netlify. Github's 2FA is really nice, actually; you can add multiple U2F keys and you can also u…

I work for netlify. We support 2FA on any tier, since you can auth via git provider and require 2FA there.

We presently don't support REQUIRED 2FA (you can also set a password) under the enterprise account level, since that's what enables SSO using a SAML-based identity provider and enforcing those limits there.

Post reply on HN