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

Netlify acquires Gatsby

netlify.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 147 posts

Re: Netlify acquires Gatsby

#71

Post by bluSCALE4 »

corywatilo wrote: post #69

Netlify lost my trust a year ago when they tried to increase our company's pricing more than 10x. (We were paying ~$200/mo, then they tried to force us into a $2,500+ plan because we were 1 seat over their self-serve threshold.) From my perspective, they were adding features just to find ways to grow revenue. (I get it, you don't have a huge moat by simply hosting static sites.) But their features seemed very out of…

Sounds like they behaved exactly how you expected them to. You can't get upset because the threshold was passed.

Re: Netlify acquires Gatsby

#72

Post by discodave »

Maybe the way to think about this isn't so much from the perspective of Netflifys leadership, but Gatsby and their founders/investors.

Had Gatsby found a scalable business model?

Maybe this is more of a saving-face/acquihire for Gatsby. Granted, there is potentially some strategic benefit for Netlify, but not enough to justify a large acquisition price (the price is not mentioned in the press-release).

Re: Netlify acquires Gatsby

#73

Post by lolinder »

joshmanders wrote: post #45

Vercel has Next.js, Shopify just acquired Remix, now Netlify Gatsby. This is bad news for full stack JavaScript applications and ecosystem. This is gonna cause vendor lock-in, it's already showing in some of them. Open source is losing and something needs to change. I am seeing a future where you have to rewrite your whole app in a different framework just to change hosts.

I disagree that this is a bad thing. If the frameworks start developing lock-in they can and will be forked. In the meantime, we have multiple competing full-stack JavaScript frameworks that are being actively funded.

Also, I think Netlify and company know that a framework that is locked in won't be adopted. The history of mainstream developer tooling over the last thirty years is a migration away from proprietary languages and frameworks, and it's going to take more than a few rogue JS fullstack frameworks to change that.

Re: Netlify acquires Gatsby

#74

Post by jakelazaroff »

corywatilo wrote: post #69

Netlify lost my trust a year ago when they tried to increase our company's pricing more than 10x. (We were paying ~$200/mo, then they tried to force us into a $2,500+ plan because we were 1 seat over their self-serve threshold.) From my perspective, they were adding features just to find ways to grow revenue. (I get it, you don't have a huge moat by simply hosting static sites.) But their features seemed very out of…

> From my perspective, they were adding features just to find ways to grow revenue.

Why else would they add features?

Re: Netlify acquires Gatsby

#75

Post by discodave »

KMnO4 wrote: post #68
asadlionpk wrote: post #65

Gatsby is dead weight. Likely an acquihire.

Why would they need to pay the premium when there are literally tens of thousands very skilled devs out of work right now?

Who says they paid a premium? The price isn't mentioned in the press release.

Re: Netlify acquires Gatsby

#76

Post by simantel »

bradgessler wrote: post #70
corywatilo wrote: post #69

Netlify lost my trust a year ago when they tried to increase our company's pricing more than 10x. (We were paying ~$200/mo, then they tried to force us into a $2,500+ plan because we were 1 seat over their self-serve threshold.) From my perspective, they were adding features just to find ways to grow revenue. (I get it, you don't have a huge moat by simply hosting static sites.) But their features seemed very out of…

Is there a “back to the basics” company or offering for hosting static sites that is essentially what Netlify was when it launched?

GitHub Pages, Cloudflare Pages, Render.com's static hosting, probably others?

Re: Netlify acquires Gatsby

#77

Post by reducesuffering »

goodoldneon wrote: post #52
reducesuffering wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm surprised this was the only other comment so far about it. It has to be an acquihire. Gatsby is a dead framework going forward.

Why is it dead?

Check the 5 year chart trajectory: https://npmtrends.com/gatsby-vs-next

and

https://insights.stackoverflow.com/trends?tags=gatsby%2Cnext...

Re: Netlify acquires Gatsby

#78

Post by corywatilo »

bluSCALE4 wrote: post #71
corywatilo wrote: post #69

Netlify lost my trust a year ago when they tried to increase our company's pricing more than 10x. (We were paying ~$200/mo, then they tried to force us into a $2,500+ plan because we were 1 seat over their self-serve threshold.) From my perspective, they were adding features just to find ways to grow revenue. (I get it, you don't have a huge moat by simply hosting static sites.) But their features seemed very out of…

Sounds like they behaved exactly how you expected them to. You can't get upset because the threshold was passed.

IIRC they had recently added a user cap on self-serve customers which was new and led to this. The new pricing deck they sent was "It will be $3,500/mo, but until the end of the month, you can get it for only $2,500!" (Pricing approx.)

$2,500/mo to host a static site is ludicrous.

Re: Netlify acquires Gatsby

#79

Post by nsonha »

goodoldneon wrote: post #52
reducesuffering wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm surprised this was the only other comment so far about it. It has to be an acquihire. Gatsby is a dead framework going forward.

Why is it dead?

try it and you'll see, also have you heard the name Gatsby in the past 2 years? I think not.

Re: Netlify acquires Gatsby

#80

Post by [deleted] »

bradgessler wrote: post #70
corywatilo wrote: post #69

Netlify lost my trust a year ago when they tried to increase our company's pricing more than 10x. (We were paying ~$200/mo, then they tried to force us into a $2,500+ plan because we were 1 seat over their self-serve threshold.) From my perspective, they were adding features just to find ways to grow revenue. (I get it, you don't have a huge moat by simply hosting static sites.) But their features seemed very out of…

Is there a “back to the basics” company or offering for hosting static sites that is essentially what Netlify was when it launched?

[deleted]
Post reply on HN