Not to be rude, but these complaints, minus the "increase" are standard Heroku practice. I see no changes-- in fact, what has changed there, anything?
They're finally too expensive for you, or you outgrew them? They aren't cheap, and never have been, especially for hobbyists.
If you have a hobby, you most likely have more time than money to complete your hobby, so why, why use something like Heroku? The very nature of your activity is to spend your time, not your money, Heroku is only giving you the feeling of savings until you outgrow their nearly worthless free offering. Now you have to spend your time, moving, configuring, and learning an "entirely new" system. Had you done this the first time, you'd have saved money/time.
Yeah... "git push" to deploy is easy[1]-- and if you're new to application development it can be nice, but! It also means you have no idea how to configure or run your app (i.e. deploy). It means you're more vulnerable to your vendors quarterly earnings needs (price hikes), it means you're more vulnerable to vendor technology changes (lock-in), it also means if it ever hits the fan-- you're gonna have oodles of downtime while you learn how to do it "right" the first (nth) time.
FWIW, it's actually really easy to run a VPS that's stable once you learn how to do it properly. Don't fear it, mate. I've always found it nice since none of my projects ever get substantial traffic, I can usually run some auxiliary service I need (like Gitlab) on it too. A two for one, eh?
... One last thing, if you're running a business Heroku might be the right choice (it's up to you to evaluate the risk/reward).
[1] I personally think deploying with Capistrano is a cinch (cap deploy) but it'll take you a lil' bit of effort to set up the first time.
It means you're more vulnerable to your vendors quarterly earnings needs (price hikes), it means you're more vulnerable to vendor technology changes (lock-in)
So use an opensource PaaS.
I like Cloud Foundry, which I've worked on. All the IP belongs to a legally independent foundation. Some people like OpenShift, which is from Red Hat.
There's no reason to roll your own. Time spent half-building a half-PaaS is time that could be spent on developing stuff with user value.
Different hobbyists have different reasons for doing their hobby. Some just want to learn new tech, any tech, and for them, learning how to deploy on a VPS is a good use of time. But others would rather focus on frontend dev - it's a hobby, after all, the point is to do what's fun - or solving problems for their friends, or learning about a market. It makes no sense for these people to worry about sysadmin stuff or deployment.
Well... More concisely, what I'm trying to say here is that often time we don't consider all the costs, just the monetary ones, which leave us in situations like the poster's current one.
He considered the monetary costs, but didn't think through what other costs are associated (time/stress/performance/etc) and has come out "on bottom."
It does make sense if you do a proper cost benefit analysis, to yourself, in this situation. Otherwise, he'd pay Heroku what they're "worth" and never have written this blog post.
It didn't sound like he has come out "on bottom". Rather, it sounds like he's evaluated all the costs and decided that Linode fits his needs better.
The blog post, presumably, is because there are still things that he misses about Heroku, and so even though Linode has come out on top, he wishes that there were some sort of hybrid solution. That, and there may be other people in his situation that haven't yet made the cost/benefit analysis themselves and aren't aware of alternatives.
Comments
Not to be rude, but these complaints, minus the "increase" are standard Heroku practice. I see no changes-- in fact, what has changed there, anything?
They're finally too expensive for you, or you outgrew them? They aren't cheap, and never have been, especially for hobbyists.
If you have a hobby, you most likely have more time than money to complete your hobby, so why, why use something like Heroku? The very nature of your activity is to spend your time, not your money, Heroku is only giving you the feeling of savings until you outgrow their nearly worthless free offering. Now you have to spend your time, moving, configuring, and learning an "entirely new" system. Had you done this the first time, you'd have saved money/time.
Yeah... "git push" to deploy is easy[1]-- and if you're new to application development it can be nice, but! It also means you have no idea how to configure or run your app (i.e. deploy). It means you're more vulnerable to your vendors quarterly earnings needs (price hikes), it means you're more vulnerable to vendor technology changes (lock-in), it also means if it ever hits the fan-- you're gonna have oodles of downtime while you learn how to do it "right" the first (nth) time.
FWIW, it's actually really easy to run a VPS that's stable once you learn how to do it properly. Don't fear it, mate. I've always found it nice since none of my projects ever get substantial traffic, I can usually run some auxiliary service I need (like Gitlab) on it too. A two for one, eh?
... One last thing, if you're running a business Heroku might be the right choice (it's up to you to evaluate the risk/reward).
[1] I personally think deploying with Capistrano is a cinch (cap deploy) but it'll take you a lil' bit of effort to set up the first time.
So use an opensource PaaS.
I like Cloud Foundry, which I've worked on. All the IP belongs to a legally independent foundation. Some people like OpenShift, which is from Red Hat.
There's no reason to roll your own. Time spent half-building a half-PaaS is time that could be spent on developing stuff with user value.
Different hobbyists have different reasons for doing their hobby. Some just want to learn new tech, any tech, and for them, learning how to deploy on a VPS is a good use of time. But others would rather focus on frontend dev - it's a hobby, after all, the point is to do what's fun - or solving problems for their friends, or learning about a market. It makes no sense for these people to worry about sysadmin stuff or deployment.
Well... More concisely, what I'm trying to say here is that often time we don't consider all the costs, just the monetary ones, which leave us in situations like the poster's current one.
He considered the monetary costs, but didn't think through what other costs are associated (time/stress/performance/etc) and has come out "on bottom."
It does make sense if you do a proper cost benefit analysis, to yourself, in this situation. Otherwise, he'd pay Heroku what they're "worth" and never have written this blog post.
It didn't sound like he has come out "on bottom". Rather, it sounds like he's evaluated all the costs and decided that Linode fits his needs better.
The blog post, presumably, is because there are still things that he misses about Heroku, and so even though Linode has come out on top, he wishes that there were some sort of hybrid solution. That, and there may be other people in his situation that haven't yet made the cost/benefit analysis themselves and aren't aware of alternatives.