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

Heroku Support for .NET 10

heroku.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 48 posts

Re: Heroku Support for .NET 10

#21

Post by runesoerensen »

I wrote this post - for anyone curious, Heroku's .NET support is built on our open source .NET Cloud Native Buildpack (CNB), which is written in Rust and produces standard OCI images.

You can use it anywhere, even locally, for free. The example in the post uses the .NET 10 file-based app feature we added support for today, so if you want to try the same functionality locally, you can do something like this:

  # Create a minimal .NET 10 file-based app
  echo 'Console.WriteLine("Hello HN");' > Hello.cs

  # Build an OCI image using the .NET CNB
  pack build hello-hn --builder heroku/builder:24

  # Run it with Docker
  docker run --rm -it --entrypoint hello hello-hn

  # Output:
  Hello HN
The "classic" Heroku buildpack shown in the demo video is just a thin wrapper around the CNB implementation: https://github.com/heroku/buildpacks-dotnet

Re: Heroku Support for .NET 10

#22

Post by rk06 »

runesoerensen wrote: post #19
rk06 wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, you are not alone.for non-tech population, it may make sense that .NET 5 is continuation of .NET 4. But the tech crowd knows .net 5 is to .net 4 is what angular 2 is to angular 1. With .net 4 still in active use, the naming makes it harder

Might be more confusing when you consider that ".NET 5" is actually the continuation of ".NET Core 3.1", not ".NET Framework 4.x"[0]. Microsoft has historically been pretty bad at naming stuff (sometimes hilariously so, see Microsoft PlaysForSure[1] for an example - spoiler: it surely didn't play for long). The rebranding from .NET Core 3.1 to .NET 5, and from .NET 4.x to .NET Framework, did make sense to me though -…

the drop of .NET core branding definitely makes it worse. as the other projects(like asp.netcore, efcore) just can't drop "core" from their names on a whim.

in my opinion, they should have kept "core" branding, but shortened it to ".NET" for marketing and only for marketing.

in a better world, Microsoft would ditch the name ".NET" altogether and invent a new one. like LVM (lightweight virtual machine)

Re: Heroku Support for .NET 10

#23

Post by jf »

runesoerensen wrote: post #21

I wrote this post - for anyone curious, Heroku's .NET support is built on our open source .NET Cloud Native Buildpack (CNB), which is written in Rust and produces standard OCI images. You can use it anywhere, even locally, for free. The example in the post uses the .NET 10 file-based app feature we added support for today, so if you want to try the same functionality locally, you can do something like this: # Create…

I came here to see if AppHarbor was still running and was pleased to see this post :D

Re: Heroku Support for .NET 10

#24

Post by runesoerensen »

jf wrote: post #23
runesoerensen wrote: post #21

I wrote this post - for anyone curious, Heroku's .NET support is built on our open source .NET Cloud Native Buildpack (CNB), which is written in Rust and produces standard OCI images. You can use it anywhere, even locally, for free. The example in the post uses the .NET 10 file-based app feature we added support for today, so if you want to try the same functionality locally, you can do something like this: # Create…

I came here to see if AppHarbor was still running and was pleased to see this post :D

Hi Joel! I guess you could say AppHarbor's spirit lives on - ".NET on Heroku" feels like a pretty fitting successor to "Heroku for .NET", right?

Also, the AppHarbor blog is technically still running, so there's that :)

Hope you're doing well!

Re: Heroku Support for .NET 10

#26

Post by ptman »

gosukiwi wrote: post #20
czhu12 wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is exactly why we built https://canine.sh , to try to rebuild Heroku in the open source We begged heroku for years to lower their prices but they just kept increasing it. I even showed a rep a side by side comparison of heroku vs raw AWS costs and it was 8x. Absolutely couldn’t justify

Isn't Dokku doing that already?

There are several https://gist.github.com/ptman/1b9e3a992e6c8aeecc86b5f1fd1c5f...

Re: Heroku Support for .NET 10

#27

Post by dtech »

catlover76 wrote: post #4
cultofmetatron wrote: post #2

I lament what could have been with heroku. I did some back of the envelope calculations for what it would have cost for my own startup to run on it and it came out to significantly more than what it costs us on aws INCLUDING our dedicated devops guy. They really killed its utility for anything bigger than a hobby project.

> I lament what could have been with heroku. I did some back of the envelope calculations for what it would have cost for my own startup to run on it and it came out to significantly more than what it costs us on aws INCLUDING our dedicated devops guy. That's...nuts. o_O Are you doing something special, do you guys already have a lot of traffic?

No, Heroku is just bonkers expensive

Re: Heroku Support for .NET 10

#28

Post by kirillkosolapov »

cultofmetatron wrote: post #2

I lament what could have been with heroku. I did some back of the envelope calculations for what it would have cost for my own startup to run on it and it came out to significantly more than what it costs us on aws INCLUDING our dedicated devops guy. They really killed its utility for anything bigger than a hobby project.

As the founder of a local cloud very similar to Heroku, I understand Heroku's limitations. It's a balance between control and convenience. The simpler everything is, the better it's suited for small projects, but the less control you have for complex projects. Unless you're just running a hobby project, you'll be using Kubernetes and similar services with full control and the complexity that comes with it. Heroku uses AWS, which means they can't make computations cheaper, otherwise the economics don't add up.

In my experience, we (I won't advertise) have prices several times lower, and we try very hard to accommodate more serious projects, but 99% of projects are small and consume less than 200 MB of RAM. This is simply the nature of this market and product.

Re: Heroku Support for .NET 10

#30

Post by oaiey »

rk06 wrote: post #22
runesoerensen wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Might be more confusing when you consider that ".NET 5" is actually the continuation of ".NET Core 3.1", not ".NET Framework 4.x"[0]. Microsoft has historically been pretty bad at naming stuff (sometimes hilariously so, see Microsoft PlaysForSure[1] for an example - spoiler: it surely didn't play for long). The rebranding from .NET Core 3.1 to .NET 5, and from .NET 4.x to .NET Framework, did make sense to me though -…

the drop of .NET core branding definitely makes it worse. as the other projects(like asp.netcore, efcore) just can't drop "core" from their names on a whim. in my opinion, they should have kept "core" branding, but shortened it to ".NET" for marketing and only for marketing. in a better world, Microsoft would ditch the name ".NET" altogether and invent a new one. like LVM (lightweight virtual machine)

No. Was hard enough to convince people of .NET Core away from the .NET Framework. Adding a completely different name and I would have several hundred java devs now instead of beautiful .net 10 on Linux.
Post reply on HN