Live data from Hacker News

Tailscale has raised $160M

tailscale.com

211–220 of 354 posts

Re: Tailscale has raised $160M

#211

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is just wrong. What exactly do think companies are spending 500k on per engineer beyond the TC package?

HR, marketing, sales, management, office space, servers, licenses, insurance, etc. It seems on the high end, but not too unrealistic.

I haven't traditionally seen these areas of spend rolled into Eng costs in the budgeting process.

Re: Tailscale has raised $160M

#212
post #87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Headscale is server only. Netbird is the whole stack (basically does the same thing but completely different software/implementation)

But the tailscale client is open source too

Doesn't that also then make tailscale completely open source?

Re: Tailscale has raised $160M

#213
post #166

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Generally package is around half of what company spends per extra engineer. And $500k average for a tech heavy product company doesn't sound too far off.

Holy hell I need to ask for a raise.

When people say they get 500k they mean they get paid 200k in salary and got 300k in RSUs, with the details mixed around the edges. ICs aren't getting 500k salary except in a few rare cases.

Re: Tailscale has raised $160M

#214
post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If it's hype, it's not hype the way you're thinking. I've shown Tailscale to a lot of people (this is less salient now, when pretty much everybody uses Tailscale) and the most common reaction I've gotten is "holy shit". It is spooky simple to get working, and it's spooky simple to go from a working installation to a VPN configuration that would take many many hours to replicate with pre-existing tools. There may be V…

Because you're delegating the control plane to Tailscale. Somehow we went decades without this being a thing for security reasons, dealt with the management of VPN appliances, and now suddenly everyone is OK with Tailscale owning the control plane of their VPN for the sake of convenience.

For a company this is probably okay: companies rely on other companies all the time, and can enforce contracts. I would gladly use tailscale at my company.

For an individual, heck no. Fortunately, headscale exists for individuals to use.

Re: Tailscale has raised $160M

#215
post #87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Headscale is server only. Netbird is the whole stack (basically does the same thing but completely different software/implementation)

But the tailscale client is open source too

Not on Windows and iOS. And on the mac, the most useable client isn’t open source either.

Re: Tailscale has raised $160M

#216

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Generally package is around half of what company spends per extra engineer. And $500k average for a tech heavy product company doesn't sound too far off.

This is just wrong. What exactly do think companies are spending 500k on per engineer beyond the TC package?

Nope. 2x total comp is standard fully loaded cost.

Re: Tailscale has raised $160M

#217

I'm a fan of TS and have been a paying customer for work infra for almost a year now. It really is well put together and easy to use, but I do run up against some issues/complaints when diving deep that I hope they can work out: * The pricing tiers and included features by tier penalizes you in frustrating ways. The base plan is a reasonable $6/user/m, but if you want to use ACLs to control anything in a workable way…

> * Better tooling to determine why it's falling back to DERP instead of direct for remote clients. DERP relays should be an absolute last resort to provide connectivity for Business-plan-level customers (very slow), and the way TS works just assumes any connectivity is fine.

Tailscale touts all the perf benefits of the wireguard protocol but in practice between the userland wireguard that seems to be used all the time on all platform (even linux) and the over reliance on DERP, it has none of the performance benefits of the real thing.

Re: Tailscale has raised $160M

#218
post #27
post #2

When I saw the new round, I was instantly worried about change in direction that will most likely come with this, and effectively drive away regular users from a tool that seems universally loved. Similar sentiment can be seen in the discussion from three years ago [1] when they raised $100M. [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=31259950

When they raised the 100M three years ago, I'm pretty sure they said they didn't need it and were saving it for a rainy day (or words to that effect), always seemed very odd at the time. Two q's for anyone who cares to speculate: have they burnt the original investment already? And if not, why would they need more funding? AFAICS there's no real competition in the market place for their product today, the only thing…

I still don't know what it is and I've been reading about it for N years here. On some level, it's healthy to take capital.

Re: Tailscale has raised $160M

#219

I'm a fan of TS and have been a paying customer for work infra for almost a year now. It really is well put together and easy to use, but I do run up against some issues/complaints when diving deep that I hope they can work out: * The pricing tiers and included features by tier penalizes you in frustrating ways. The base plan is a reasonable $6/user/m, but if you want to use ACLs to control anything in a workable way…

>$6/user/m, but if you want to use ACLs to control anything in a workable way, it jumps 3x to $18/u/m.

It's market segmentation, needing ACLs is a sign you're at least an SMB, and to a business of nearly any actual size, the difference between $6/user and $18/user is 0.

Re: Tailscale has raised $160M

#220

I'm a fan of TS and have been a paying customer for work infra for almost a year now. It really is well put together and easy to use, but I do run up against some issues/complaints when diving deep that I hope they can work out: * The pricing tiers and included features by tier penalizes you in frustrating ways. The base plan is a reasonable $6/user/m, but if you want to use ACLs to control anything in a workable way…

>$6/user/m, but if you want to use ACLs to control anything in a workable way, it jumps 3x to $18/u/m. It's market segmentation, needing ACLs is a sign you're at least an SMB, and to a business of nearly any actual size, the difference between $6/user and $18/user is 0.

Um, it's 3x the cost to get one feature. By your logic they should be charging $100/user/mo for the feature since that must also be the same. This is typical "enterprise" nonsense pricing and it will absolutely drive some adopters to look elsewhere.
Post reply on HN