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

31–40 of 48 posts

Re: Heroku Support for .NET 10

#31

Post by cpursley »

sleepy_keita wrote: post #3
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.

Yeah. It used to be the go-to for starting simple projects. We have quite a bit of other options in this space now, though - GH Pages, Cloudflare workers, Vercel, Netlify, etc etc...

Those are static site providers. For actual server paas that can run docker containers, render.com and fly.io are what heroku could have evolved to.

Re: Heroku Support for .NET 10

#32

Post by cpursley »

kirillkosolapov wrote: post #28
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 use…

I’ll bite, what’s your product. I’m always interested in these types of platforms.

Re: Heroku Support for .NET 10

#33

Post by oaiey »

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 -…

.NET Framework was always called .NET Framework and not renamed from NET 4 to .NET Framework. There was a time where .NET was applied as a prefix/suffix to everything Microsoft released. Microsoft Windows Server .NET. that had nothing to do with the framework/CLR/programming platform but with Internet connected features.

Re: Heroku Support for .NET 10

#35

Post by pjc50 »

kwanbix wrote: post #12

.net is probably one of the top 10 worst names in history or is it only me?

No, that's Microsoft's other work in the XBox line. Try saying "Xbox Series X" and "Xbox Series S" and "XBox One S" to ten normal people and asking them to find the correct matching product in a store.

Re: Heroku Support for .NET 10

#36

Post by jumpkick »

runjake wrote: post #14
kwanbix wrote: post #12

.net is probably one of the top 10 worst names in history or is it only me?

Probably. But I got over it 25 years ago. I think of it as “dotnet” in my head which seems better.

Do people say .net in some way other than "dotnet"? Or did I misunderstand?

Re: Heroku Support for .NET 10

#37

Post by andsoitis »

kwanbix wrote: post #12

.net is probably one of the top 10 worst names in history or is it only me?

Some fun ones:

- Colgate Kitchen Entrees

- Ayds Diet Candy

- Gerber in Africa (in many regions, it is customary for labels to show what's inside. Having a baby on the bottle is just weird)

- Chevrolet Nova (no va means "don't go")

- Clairol Mist Stick (in Germany. In German, Mist means manure)

- Pee Cola (Ghana)

- Puffs Tissues (Germany) (in German slang, Puff means brothel)

- Nokia Lumia (prostitute in Spanish slang)

- ISIS Chocolates (Belgium)

- Hitachi's Woopie Washing Machine (cute to a Japanese ear, but not to that of an English speaker)

Re: Heroku Support for .NET 10

#38

Post by debarshri »

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?

Community compiled list of Heroku alternatives.

https://github.com/debarshibasak/awesome-paas

Re: Heroku Support for .NET 10

#39

Post by catlover76 »

dtech wrote: post #27
catlover76 wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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

[dead]

Re: Heroku Support for .NET 10

#40

Post by orphea »

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)

I don't agree. "Core" is another Microsoft-classic crappy nondescriptive piece of naming. I'm glad it went away.
Post reply on HN