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

N8n raises $180M

blog.n8n.io

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

181–190 of 198 posts

Re: N8n raises $180M

#181

Post by alluro2 »

One thing I don't get fully is people that say "it's easier to write code" - we use n8n for workflow orchestration - a junior developer can put together some nodes to e.g. get data from an API, transform it (by writing code), prepare a CSV, send an email. In about an hour. You then have a workflow that you set to run every night at 2am, and that you can open, understand visually at a glance, modify, and continue running without any other actions required. All self-hosted on a small VM.

Alternative would be writing custom code, deploying it somewhere, setting it to run automatically on schedule somehow, and modifying it and redeploying through a dozen steps every time.

Of course there is docker and cron and deployment scripts - but all of that is not needed with n8n for these kinds of use-cases.

For me, that's the primary value of n8n - nodes themselves are nice-to-have shortcuts, some of the time. Maybe I'm not familiar with tools that make it easy to "just write code" and have everything else (deployment, orchestration etc) covered?

Re: N8n raises $180M

#183

Post by nailer »

skrtskrt wrote: post #109

Here come the HN comments from people that work at closed source companies or companies that profit off the free labor of open source devs, wailing and gnashing their teeth that it's not the purest form of open source blessed by Stallman himself and therefore is radioactive and doomed to fail.

There is no ‘purest form of open source’. There is software that meets the open source definition and software that doesn’t. If you’re on HN it’s surprising you’re not aware of this.

stallman is from the free software movement which doesn’t agree with open source since FSF is concerned with moral freedoms.

Re: N8n raises $180M

#184

Post by kristopherleads »

jitl wrote: post #136
seer wrote: post #133

While n8n is amazing for the odd office automation and giving semi-technical people an enormously powerful tool to get things done, it seems it can’t really replace a real backend, and mostly because of the n8n team choices than any technology. We were trailing it and wanted to essentially switch our entire backend to it - and technically it seemed to be able to do the job, but their licensing turned out to not be a…

Surely you can negotiate an unlimited amount of executions?

You could, but then you start getting into additional costs, controlling how much of your metrics are surfaced vs. kept internal, etc. At that point, why not just go for another solution?

Like you could make a car like a truck, but why not just buy a truck in the first place?

Re: N8n raises $180M

#185

Post by kristopherleads »

j45 wrote: post #149
seer wrote: post #133

While n8n is amazing for the odd office automation and giving semi-technical people an enormously powerful tool to get things done, it seems it can’t really replace a real backend, and mostly because of the n8n team choices than any technology. We were trailing it and wanted to essentially switch our entire backend to it - and technically it seemed to be able to do the job, but their licensing turned out to not be a…

It's an orchestration tool. Backends are a lot more than just orchestration. There are alternatives to n8n depending on your stack of what is being orchestrated. Node-red, and others have quietly existed for a very long time, similar to how n8n existed for a good while before being discovered by the AI world.

I guess the bigger question is why use two tools when you can use one? Full disclosure I work at Node-RED/FlowFuse, so take that into consideration, but the point remains - if you need to use both an orchestration tool and a flow management/backend management tool, why not use one solution that does both excellently?

I think that's a critical argument that n8n and others will have to overcome - why should users decide to over-specialise one aspect of their stack when they can do so much more and have so much more control elsewhere?

Re: N8n raises $180M

#186

Post by dahart »

cmsj wrote: post #80
dahart wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Open source does mean source available to many people, especially the non-programmer lay-public, no matter how much OSI and people who adopt OSI’s definition dislike it, c.f. the dictionary https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/open-source (And BTW I like OSI’s definition!) Instead of claiming the words “open source” always mean OSI’s definition, it’d be better to clarify up front that you’re talking about OSI’s…

I would argue completely the opposite, and that we actually have a very clear set of descriptors available to us, each of which is a subset of the following ones: * Free Software - meets FSF's four freedoms * Open Source - meets OSI's definition * Source Available - you can read the source code

Yes we have clear & good descriptors available. I wasn’t arguing against those. I was simply pointing out that those aren’t the only definitions of the words free & open, which is a fact. It’s a fact that FSF and OSI have both used in their own arguments! I’m slightly surprised by the pushback and downvotes (which probably means I didn’t state things clearly or come off how I intended). OSI’s definition is logical today but took a long time to develop. It’s one of those things that’s hard to imagine never having heard, but if you had never heard it, you almost certainly wouldn’t jump to OSI’s definition upon hearing “open source” the first time. The lay public generally doesn’t either, and don’t know about licenses and the software community’s terms of art.

Re: N8n raises $180M

#187

Post by dahart »

jauntywundrkind wrote: post #76
dahart wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Open source does mean source available to many people, especially the non-programmer lay-public, no matter how much OSI and people who adopt OSI’s definition dislike it, c.f. the dictionary https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/open-source (And BTW I like OSI’s definition!) Instead of claiming the words “open source” always mean OSI’s definition, it’d be better to clarify up front that you’re talking about OSI’s…

Source available but you can't use it professionally or commercially doesn't feel open source at all to me, and I disapprove of trying to weasel word around that. Rather than clarify confusion & raise a real and important distinction, this post carries water for obfuscation and confusion: if people aren't clear the answer isn't to loosen the definition, it's to make the distinction clearer.

Non-programmers and the lay public do not assume what source available means, nor what open source means, in terms of what you can and can’t do with it. Most lay people would assume that if source is available, then you can do what you want with it. This is what a lot of programmers assumed before OSI and FSF existed. Saying that many people think these two terms (open source, and source available) mean the same thing does not imply that anyone is suggesting that you can’t use code professionally or commercially. It’s a negative assumption on your part to accuse people of weaseling just because they don’t know your industry term of art definition.

Re: N8n raises $180M

#188

Post by jitl »

kristopherleads wrote: post #184
jitl wrote: post #136

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Surely you can negotiate an unlimited amount of executions?

You could, but then you start getting into additional costs, controlling how much of your metrics are surfaced vs. kept internal, etc. At that point, why not just go for another solution? Like you could make a car like a truck, but why not just buy a truck in the first place?

It's more like they sell a truck, but disable it remotely if I drive more than 50 miles a day. And I want to drive unlimited miles.

> then you start getting into additional costs, controlling how much of your metrics are surfaced vs. kept internal, etc

I don't know what this means. In my experience with anything sold B2B, all the terms are negotiable. If you want unlimited everything, you can ask for that.

Re: N8n raises $180M

#189

Post by rehevkor5 »

anticorporate wrote: post #7
BoredPositron wrote: post #2

5000 n8n workflows that made me millions. 1 n8n workflow that made me 5k per hour... It's an okay product I appreciate that it's selfhosted with good documentation but they absolutely destroyed their brand with excessive affiliate marketing and now nothing of substance is left if you search for it anywhere.

This. I like n8n. It feels a little less rough around the edges for visual coding than something like huggin or nodered. The documentation is good, but finding examples and things like that offsite is impossible.

The documentation leaves a lot to be desired. Especially regarding custom node development. But also on the user side, for example the kaka trigger node has zero info on its doc page.

Re: N8n raises $180M

#190

Post by j45 »

kristopherleads wrote: post #185
j45 wrote: post #149

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's an orchestration tool. Backends are a lot more than just orchestration. There are alternatives to n8n depending on your stack of what is being orchestrated. Node-red, and others have quietly existed for a very long time, similar to how n8n existed for a good while before being discovered by the AI world.

I guess the bigger question is why use two tools when you can use one? Full disclosure I work at Node-RED/FlowFuse, so take that into consideration, but the point remains - if you need to use both an orchestration tool and a flow management/backend management tool, why not use one solution that does both excellently? I think that's a critical argument that n8n and others will have to overcome - why should users decid…

I use both.. And yes, both handle calls between different APIs.

One for the many, and maybe one for a different audience.

Node-red didn't have a login at the time, and was well geared towards direct IoT type flowing. I loved how I can just jump into the logic and flows.

N8N has a lot of pre-configured connectors.

If Node-red had the pre-configured connectors to different systems as easy as n8n, I think the point here would be even stronger.

It's why I use both. I start with the low level, and if orchestration beyond it is needed, I can tie in another tool if needed.

Post reply on HN