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

An Update on Heroku

heroku.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

201–210 of 366 posts

Re: An Update on Heroku

#201

Post by glenngillen »

altairprime wrote: post #140
simonw wrote: post #10

"We know changes like this can raise questions, and we want to be clear about what this means for customers." Proceeds to not be clear about what this means for customers.

As a former enterprise person, this clearly states “exiting growth cycle into low-staffing maintenance mode”; Salesforce must have bought them to kill a price-beating competitor to multi-year Salesforce PaaS contracts, same as Okta did with Auth0. Investors are typically-majority short-sighted and only care about growth-cycle revenue, so once they reached market saturation, they were ripe and duly reaped. So long, He…

Absolutely none of this is true. What was the PaaS Heroku was apparently beating at the time of the acquisition?

Re: An Update on Heroku

#202

Post by sealeck »

sm123 wrote: post #65
sebiw wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yup, their Git Push Deployment was really a killer concept and a huge gateway for people just writing good apps not needing to care about infra and still being able to get a production-ready setup.

Couldn’t agree more. That “git push and you’re live” moment removed a huge amount of accidental complexity, and it’s been the guiding experience behind what we’re building at Build.io.

Even when you build cool things it's respectful not to plant them in HN comments :)

I think the usual solution to this is to talk about cool stuff you've done that is only incidentally relevant to the product you're selling. For example, some detail on how you built a technical system or solved a problem, etc...

Re: An Update on Heroku

#203

Post by BoorishBears »

satvikpendem wrote: post #138
BoorishBears wrote: post #136

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Very close to the worst alternative for people who actually need Heroku, but it won't stop people from plugging it to death and back.

Eh, no, depends on why you used Heroku in the first place. Way back when, I used it because the UI was dead simple and it Just Worked™. If I can replicate that with a VPS and have a good UI around it that takes care of everything, it's functionally the same to me.

"Depends on what you used it for" applies to just about any platform.

Realistically, self-hosting the PaaS defeats the purpose of a PaaS for the crowd Heroku was attracting.

Re: An Update on Heroku

#204

Post by ergocoder »

Reading the blog post, I thought I wasn't good at English. Well, I am a non-native English speaker.

Reading the comments, it turns out the blog post says nothing.

Reading the between lines, Heroku is being deprecated.

Re: An Update on Heroku

#205

Post by satvikpendem »

BoorishBears wrote: post #203
satvikpendem wrote: post #138

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Eh, no, depends on why you used Heroku in the first place. Way back when, I used it because the UI was dead simple and it Just Worked™. If I can replicate that with a VPS and have a good UI around it that takes care of everything, it's functionally the same to me.

"Depends on what you used it for" applies to just about any platform. Realistically, self-hosting the PaaS defeats the purpose of a PaaS for the crowd Heroku was attracting.

Heroku was one of the first to have that seamless UX, only after which others like Fly or Render or Railway came to copy it. I wager people were primarily attracted to that user experience and only minimally cared that it was fully hosted versus not, because there was also AWS at that time.

Re: An Update on Heroku

#206

Post by glenngillen »

bearjaws wrote: post #88

The downfall of Heroku should be studied, they had lightning in a bottle and blew it. Salesforce acquired them and just let it die, baffling.

They had lightning in a bottle because they had an amazing developer experience… and gave everyone free compute and data transfer.

So much of the value was already delivered in that simple `git push heroku master` which gave you a container + load balancer + a database. The vast majority of people didn’t need more. And of those that were left that did far too few of them were willing to suddenly start paying $32/mo per dyno (you just gave me one for free! I only want one more!) or make the jump to multiple hundreds of dollars for a database.

Read any of the threads about Heroku over the years. The biggest complaint is always “it’s too expensive”. Even when a large percentage of what was on people’s bills were add-ons like databases, new relic, redis, logging, etc (i.e., not Heroku).

Re: An Update on Heroku

#207

Post by 999900000999 »

When I was young, the startup company I was at used heroku for fast deploys.

We eventually migrated to AWS directly, because Heroku basically exploits you.

Now I'd probably use Fly IO if not just a lambda with AWS gateway.

I don't like building backends and will avoid doing so if possible.

Re: An Update on Heroku

#208

Post by pigbearpig »

bearjaws wrote: post #88

The downfall of Heroku should be studied, they had lightning in a bottle and blew it. Salesforce acquired them and just let it die, baffling.

Huh? I'm no fan of Salesforce, but they bought Heroku in 2010. That's not "just letting it die."

Re: An Update on Heroku

#209

Post by pigbearpig »

pjmlp wrote: post #124
bearjaws wrote: post #88

The downfall of Heroku should be studied, they had lightning in a bottle and blew it. Salesforce acquired them and just let it die, baffling.

It is a typical acquisition by the book, always goes the same way after three to five years.

It was 16 years...
Post reply on HN