We use them for our middleman based website. They are fantastic from a performance and support standpoint.
Netlify, a sevice for quickly rolling out static websites, raises $2.1M
21–27 of 27 posts
Re: Netlify, a sevice for quickly rolling out static websites, raises $2.1M
#22At first I didn't understand the difference between Netlify vs. Jekyll / Hugo + s3_website [1] + S3/CloudFront + git. Admittedly, (1) the OP does a terrible job differentiating the two, and (2) there's significant overlap. Netlify is built for "dynamic" static websites, or rather JavaScript applications (whether they be single-page or not, it doesn't matter). It serves up a static page, and the JS and APIs do the res…
We have a pretty extensive comparison here of S3 vs Netlify: https://www.netlify.com/blog/2015/03/06/comparing-netlify-an... You're completely forgetting Continuous deployment in your comparison, which is a pretty big part of the modern static workflow. This includes things like pushing branches to different URLs, having a way to previewing pull requests, caching dependencies between runs, etc, etc... It's a huge par…
Being able to instantly go back to any previous version and click through the content without impacting the git workflow is a great feature.
Re: Netlify, a sevice for quickly rolling out static websites, raises $2.1M
#23Earlier quoted context omitted.
We have a pretty extensive comparison here of S3 vs Netlify: https://www.netlify.com/blog/2015/03/06/comparing-netlify-an... You're completely forgetting Continuous deployment in your comparison, which is a pretty big part of the modern static workflow. This includes things like pushing branches to different URLs, having a way to previewing pull requests, caching dependencies between runs, etc, etc... It's a huge par…
Appreciate you taking the time to respond. It seems like you're targeting two different markets (developers & their clients/employers), and having to construct two different product stories. Of course, what appeals to the developer market doesn't necessarily appeal to their client/employers and vice versa. I'm speaking as a freelance developer that's firmly in your target market, charging well in excess of $49/month,…
If you don't need the features on the $49 dollar plan - why not just set them up with the free plan or the basic plan?
The people that pay for the $49/$349 or $1000 are typically clients with projects that are not simple "static sites". Typically these sites includes content management and requires a build to run everytime and editor triggers a change. They're often .com's for companies that always ends up needing proxying because they have legacy apps behind different URL
Other clients have in-house dev teams and run their main web application on Netlify with constant updates in different branches and pull requests, and Netlify lets them collabarote across these.
Again others just have large global presences and care about having someone to escalate to if there's a problem with a launch, any uptime, certificate, configuration issue or the like.
Those are the one that needs and use our Pro/Global/Enterprise tiers.
Re: Netlify, a sevice for quickly rolling out static websites, raises $2.1M
#24I think I'm not understanding what it does, but why does it cost $9/mo/site to serve some static content? Isn't that basically free nowadays? I guess my question is "what does Netlify do that GitHub pages doesn't"?
Netlify CTO here (so I'm very biased). These are some things that you can do with our Pages tier FREE , that you cannot do with GH Pages: - We don't restrict people to only one static site generator, like Jekyll. You have use whatever with our Continuous Deployment. - Automatic rollbacks at the CDN level. If you push a broken site, you don't need to stress about fixing the issue, pushing again, and waiting until the…
I see, thank you for your answers! To be honest, I don't think it's worth the price for me when I can get a server for $5 and push as many sites as I want, but a friend of mine loves you, so you must be doing something right!
Also, as other commented have said, you don't need a paid account to publish with GitHub pages, and it doesn't restrict you to one generator either, it will happily publish whatever HTML.
Re: Netlify, a sevice for quickly rolling out static websites, raises $2.1M
#25I think I'm not understanding what it does, but why does it cost $9/mo/site to serve some static content? Isn't that basically free nowadays? I guess my question is "what does Netlify do that GitHub pages doesn't"?
Netlify CTO here (so I'm very biased). These are some things that you can do with our Pages tier FREE , that you cannot do with GH Pages: - We don't restrict people to only one static site generator, like Jekyll. You have use whatever with our Continuous Deployment. - Automatic rollbacks at the CDN level. If you push a broken site, you don't need to stress about fixing the issue, pushing again, and waiting until the…
Edit: I know the parent comments are comparing to Github. I thought that it would be useful to let people know about Gitlab's offering.
It appears Gitlab provides support for custom domains on their hosted Gitlab solution as well as support for different site generators via their Gitlab CI solution. It is probably not as easy to use as Netlify though.
http://docs.gitlab.com/ee/pages/README.html#gitlab-pages-on-...
Re: Netlify, a sevice for quickly rolling out static websites, raises $2.1M
#26Earlier quoted context omitted.
Netlify CTO here (so I'm very biased). These are some things that you can do with our Pages tier FREE , that you cannot do with GH Pages: - We don't restrict people to only one static site generator, like Jekyll. You have use whatever with our Continuous Deployment. - Automatic rollbacks at the CDN level. If you push a broken site, you don't need to stress about fixing the issue, pushing again, and waiting until the…
Edit: I know the parent comments are comparing to Github. I thought that it would be useful to let people know about Gitlab's offering. It appears Gitlab provides support for custom domains on their hosted Gitlab solution as well as support for different site generators via their Gitlab CI solution. It is probably not as easy to use as Netlify though. http://docs.gitlab.com/ee/pages/README.html#gitlab-pages-on-...
I love Gitlab and use it for all my projects, I should try their Pages at some point (although I don't use GH pages either, it was just the offering I was more familiar with from hearing about it).
EDIT: Just tried it, I can't believe how easy it was. Literally just add a CI task that outputs a "pages" artifact.
Re: Netlify, a sevice for quickly rolling out static websites, raises $2.1M
#27I think I'm not understanding what it does, but why does it cost $9/mo/site to serve some static content? Isn't that basically free nowadays? I guess my question is "what does Netlify do that GitHub pages doesn't"?
Netlify CTO here (so I'm very biased). These are some things that you can do with our Pages tier FREE , that you cannot do with GH Pages: - We don't restrict people to only one static site generator, like Jekyll. You have use whatever with our Continuous Deployment. - Automatic rollbacks at the CDN level. If you push a broken site, you don't need to stress about fixing the issue, pushing again, and waiting until the…
how much space do you allow? What kinds of asset can I keep?
> - We don't restrict people to only one static site generator, like Jekyll.
What does that mean? How would any host know how I generated my static site?