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

Cloudflare acquires Astro

astro.build

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 409 posts

Re: Cloudflare acquires Astro

#131

Post by Imustaskforhelp »

nindalf wrote: post #125
MarkusAllen wrote: post #46

[flagged]

SQLite made and makes a lot of money from a lot of the people who use them. It's free for us to use, but it wasn't free for Motorola and AOL and Nokia (and later Google, Apple and Adobe) who contracted the team to build it out, add features, fix bugs on it. This wasn't FOSS funded by a few people's free time. It was a commercial business that made money by finding product market fit - the best embedded database in th…

> If you can find paying customers that can fund your development, then it's fantastic. It's even better if those contracts give you scale that none of your competitors have. You don't need VC money if that's the case. But let's not pretend that Astro were in that situation. No one was paying for a web framework.

Didn't this just happen right now that Astro got acquired by Cloudflare? I am sure that Cloudflare has bot tons of money right now so Astro got an offer to good to refuse but worst case scenario they could've still partnered up with cloudflare,netlify,vercel etc. but also companies who deploy astro (even google deploys astro pages)

Plus, Astro has a very strong focus on being performant/fast (getting 100 lightscore) so they could've definitely focused on consultance as well to actually have the people who work in the craft who can take a look and help you get score who literally know the inside out of Astro

That being said, the Question is, could they have survived long enough to be in a position of sustainability without VC money or could they have gotten sustainability from the start, if so what could be the path that they could've taken so that they didn't need VC money or could be (day-1 profitable ie?)

Re: Cloudflare acquires Astro

#132

Post by Aurornis »

MarkusAllen wrote: post #46

[flagged]

Meta response: This account’s recent comment history is almost exclusively self promotion for their content, YouTube channel, and school. Much of the comment text appears LLM generated with classic signs such as the em dash, bullet point lists, and this-not-that comparisons that are common to LLM generated output.

It’s noteworthy because this comment is currently the top voted comment, probably because it hits all the notes of what you’d get if you asked an LLM to generate some content to tap into anger in a Hacker News comment section. It’s scary that this type of LLM powered engagement bait is so successfully being used to advertise on HN.

Re: Cloudflare acquires Astro

#133

Post by [deleted] »

nozzlegear wrote: post #122

I'm a little wary of this. I'd been using Gatsby for my static websites for a long time, until it got eaten up by Netlify and then sunset; I switched over to Astro at that point, but now I'm getting a sense of déjà vu.

[deleted]

Re: Cloudflare acquires Astro

#135

Post by Imustaskforhelp »

Trufa wrote: post #123
furyofantares wrote: post #113

Earlier quoted context omitted.

LLM generated reply right here. Not the worst I've seen but please just post your prompt.

Damn, I didn't notice it at all, but now it's quite obvious, it feels like stuff like this is taking the enjoyment out of consuming anything.

I did notice after seeing all the em-dashes. Shame because in a sense I could've agreed with them or atleast have a good discussion but if they didn't even take time to write their posts then oof

If the purpose of this was to promote their academy or school or whatever, what was the point? Because at this point, they have lost all credibility and respect and HN isn't a gullible audience so I don't understand the point of why they did this

Re: Cloudflare acquires Astro

#136

Post by jasona123 »

Only mildly surprising - Astro + CF Pages/Workers have been my go-to for when I want to spin up a static site or do anything else and it does feel like they've been really working on the integration between the two.

Re: Cloudflare acquires Astro

#137

Post by adverbly »

philipallstar wrote: post #6

It would be good to understand what Cloudflare gets out of the deal. The article is very much just "Astro, but someone else pays the bills!" which is of course lovely for Astro.

I for one host several Astro sites on Cloudflare Pages.

Its quite a nice DX actually.

I could see Cloudflare just wanting to push for a bit more vertical integration in the space to give themselves some more options.

Re: Cloudflare acquires Astro

#139

Post by nonethewiser »

Aurornis wrote: post #132
MarkusAllen wrote: post #46

[flagged]

Meta response: This account’s recent comment history is almost exclusively self promotion for their content, YouTube channel, and school. Much of the comment text appears LLM generated with classic signs such as the em dash, bullet point lists, and this-not-that comparisons that are common to LLM generated output. It’s noteworthy because this comment is currently the top voted comment, probably because it hits all th…

Also: "This isn't X. It's Y.".

The criticism is also not very pointed. Like, I don't understand what the core message is. There is disdain for VC money and an implication that Astro could have gone without monetization. Both of which don't seem very well argued. But even if we grant those points ... so what? What is our take away supposed to be? It's a bunch of negative observations that don't funnel into some concrete conclusion.

It seems like the takeaway is supposed to be to look favorably on the commenter. "This is bad. I am good."

Re: Cloudflare acquires Astro

#140

Post by Aurornis »

__jonas wrote: post #35

I like the idea behind Astro, I've used it for a couple websites here and there. I'm a bit worried about the complexity brought by Astro supporting all these different frameworks through its adapters, and how stable and maintainable those websites will be in the future. For instance: I've been using Astro with Svelte to build static sites with some components that require client-side interactivity. I really like that…

I like the concept of making frameworks pluggable with different adapters. In my experience, though, it’s dangerous to hitch your wagon to anything but the top 1 or 2 most popular adapters in a given project like this.

The JavaScript web framework ecosystem has this problem everywhere lately where frameworks try to be everything to everyone and support every use case anyone might want. It’s noble in theory but without dedicated and active maintainers for each combination there’s bound to be something left behind.

My heuristic has been to only use adapters that the core project maintainers appear to favor. The maintainers for sub-project adapters that are introduced later frequently have maintainers that come and go, with long periods where things start breaking and nobody is interested in fixing them.

Post reply on HN