11–14 of 14 posts
Why would I use this instead of Fly.io or AWS Global Accelerator?
Lots of major companies still today don't have a global deployment platform. A lot of stuff is still very centralized because the complexity of managing infrastructure multiplies with the complexity of the existing infrastructure.
Do they actually need one? With replicated deployments you will want a globally replicated database as well. This makes operating your app n times expensive and time-consuming where n is the amount of locations
Why would I use this instead of Fly.io or AWS Global Accelerator?
I think that we provide a higher level experience than Fly. Regarding AWS global accelerator, I haven't tested the product, but from what I see we also provide a higher-level experience: we take as input a GitHub repo or a container image, so we can abstract away the VM layer, EC2 - we directly run "applications", not virtual machines
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think that we provide a higher level experience than Fly. Regarding AWS global accelerator, I haven't tested the product, but from what I see we also provide a higher-level experience: we take as input a GitHub repo or a container image, so we can abstract away the VM layer, EC2 - we directly run "applications", not virtual machines
Experience is subjective. People seem to be fine with what Fly offers already. If the high-level experience was a requirement, nobody would be using Fly today. And enterprise customers, who need multi-region already have a solution or seek a solution based on their own cloud (AWS, Azure, GCP all have multi-region offerings)
imo Fly targets more techy users than Koyeb. For example, to setup continuous deployments, you are expected to setup a Github Action (https://fly.io/docs/app-guides/continuous-deployment-with-gi...). If you know what you are doing, it's fine. We want to provide a more managed experience by embedding this kind of capabilities in the platform.
So I would say that Fly is more flexible while we are more accessible