cultofmetatron25 days ago
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.
czhu1225 days ago
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
gosukiwi25 days ago
Isn't Dokku doing that already?
ptman25 days ago
There are several https://gist.github.com/ptman/1b9e3a992e6c8aeecc86b5f1fd1c5f...
debarshri25 days ago
Community compiled list of Heroku alternatives.
sleepy_keita25 days ago
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...
cpursley25 days ago
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.
kirillkosolapov25 days ago
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.
mycall24 days ago
Is there some layers that run over kubernetes that makes it work similar to heroku in ease? That would either be the best or the worst of both worlds, unsure.
cpursley25 days ago
I’ll bite, what’s your product. I’m always interested in these types of platforms.
netdevphoenix23 days ago
It's hard to compare, surely as heroku is basically aws + virtual 24/7 generic dev ops guy. Aws will always be cheaper because heroku itself runs on it. Afaik, the USP of heroku is deployment ease for small/medium projects. If you need complex setups, you need to roll your own in aws.
catlover7625 days ago
> 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?
dtech25 days ago
No, Heroku is just bonkers expensive
catlover7625 days ago
[dead]
runesoerensenop25 days ago
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
tehmantra25 days ago
Paketo buildpacks have also been updated with .NET 10 support day one. https://blog.paketo.io/posts/paketo-dotnet-10-support/
jf25 days ago
I came here to see if AppHarbor was still running and was pleased to see this post :D
runesoerensenop25 days ago
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!
bastawhiz25 days ago
I suppose congrats to Salesforce for inventing the most expensive way to run .Net 10?
keyle25 days ago
$1 per function call is possible. /s
SeriousM25 days ago
Isn't that what make.com tries to achieve? Already at 1c per node invocation...
weird-eye-issue24 days ago
I agree the pricing is ridiculous, but to be fair, it's a different use case because automation tools like that are primarily geared for marketing teams and other non-technical users to connect different systems together. So you're mostly paying for the built-in integrations themselves rather than compute
tlhunter25 days ago
Day 1 support for a new runtime is impressive.
How long does it take AWS Lambda to support the latest Node.js LTS release?
jve25 days ago
There is also .NET 10 release post for more general discussion on .NET 10 that somehow fell off the ranking: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45888620
mythz25 days ago
How does running on expensive clouds become newsworthy?
oofbey25 days ago
TIL: Heroku is still online. A shadow of its former self but still there.
christophilus25 days ago
I upvoted it before reading, thinking it was Haiku (OS) not Heroku (overpriced SaaS thing). Maybe others did the same?
weird-eye-issue25 days ago
Just you
[deleted]25 days agocollapsed
kwanbix25 days ago
.net is probably one of the top 10 worst names in history or is it only me?
pjc5025 days ago
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.
kwanbix25 days ago
You are missing Xbox One X there!
runjake25 days ago
Probably. But I got over it 25 years ago. I think of it as “dotnet” in my head which seems better.
jumpkick25 days ago
Do people say .net in some way other than "dotnet"? Or did I misunderstand?
runjake25 days ago
I worded that badly, but what I meant is I almost never use ".net", I use "dotnet". Eg, when I'm typing up documentation or an email.
locusofself25 days ago
this is the way .. I mostly just think of it as c# too (I know f# etc exists but nobody I know is using it)
rk0625 days ago
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
runesoerensenop25 days ago
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 - and increasingly so as development continues on ".NET > 5" with yearly releases, while ".NET Framework 4.x" is in maintenance mode.
[0]:https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/dotnet/core/whats-new/dotn...
oaiey25 days ago
.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.
runesoerensenop25 days ago
Fair enough - I meant that, at least in Microsoft's own communication, they started more consistently referring to .NET Framework 4.x to differentiate it from first .NET Core and later .NET.
While it was always called .NET Framework, it was very commonly referred to simply as .NET (e.g. .NET 4.5) - and the "Microsoft .NET" logo was widely used in .NET Framework branding/marketing.
rk0625 days ago
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)
oaiey25 days ago
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.
orphea25 days ago
I don't agree. "Core" is another Microsoft-classic crappy nondescriptive piece of naming. I'm glad it went away.
[deleted]25 days agocollapsed
andsoitis25 days ago
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)
kwanbix25 days ago
Well, Suzuki Pajero which in (some?) spanish (dialects) means Suzuki Wanker.
catlover7625 days ago
[dead]