Don't use these services for your SaaS

Summary

In this video, the speaker critiques no-code and low-code platforms like Supabase, Vercel, and Netlify, arguing that while they promise ease of use, they often lead to significant limitations and costly issues for serious SaaS applications. Sharing a personal experience with Supabase, which resulted in repeated outages and inadequate support, the speaker emphasizes the advantages of using traditional cloud services like AWS and Google Cloud instead. They advocate for embracing the learning curve of these robust platforms, asserting that the control and reliability they offer outweigh the initial complexity.

Takeaways

• 😀 No-code tools aim to simplify the process of getting to market faster for founders with limited technical experience.
• 😠 Low-code platforms like Supabase, Vercel, and Netlify can lead to significant challenges and unexpected costs for serious SaaS applications.
• ⚠️ The speaker had a negative experience with Supabase, encountering repeated service failures that led to downtime and financial losses.
• 📉 Services like Supabase may be suitable for small projects, but they often lack essential features for larger, real-world applications.
• 🚫 Lack of access to underlying infrastructure in low-code platforms can limit users' ability to troubleshoot and resolve issues effectively.
• 💰 The speaker highlights extreme cases where founders faced hefty bills due to DDoS attacks or service shutdowns from other platforms like Vercel and Netlify.
• 🛠️ Despite initial complexity, the speaker advocates for using AWS or Google Cloud directly as a more robust and cost-effective alternative.
• 🔄 Migrating to traditional cloud services can lead to improved application stability and fewer headaches in the long run.
• 🗣️ The speaker encourages open discussion about these viewpoints, acknowledging that opinions on this topic may vary.
• 💡 Familiarity with coding can demystify cloud services, making them just as quick and efficient for deployment as low-code solutions.

Q & A

What are no-code and low-code tools, and how do they differ?

No-code tools require no coding experience and are designed for users without technical backgrounds, while low-code tools still target developers but simplify the deployment process.

What issues did the speaker encounter with Supabase?

The speaker experienced significant downtime due to a crashing cluster, which led to financial losses and inadequate support from Supabase during the crisis.

How did the speaker's experience with technical support from Supabase unfold?

The technical support was unhelpful; they could not identify the underlying issue and only restarted the cluster, which failed to resolve the recurring problems.

What are some of the limitations of using low-code platforms for SaaS applications?

Low-code platforms often lack access to essential features like message queues, event pipelines, and proper monitoring, making them unsuitable for serious SaaS applications.

What financial implications did the speaker face due to the issues with Supabase?

The speaker incurred additional costs for migrating to AWS, refunded users, and experienced losses during the downtime, which were not fully compensated by Supabase.

What alternatives does the speaker suggest instead of low-code platforms?

The speaker suggests using AWS or Google Cloud directly, emphasizing that while they may appear more complex initially, they provide more control and reliability.

What are some reported issues from other founders using similar platforms?

Founders have reported serious problems like unexpected account closures and exorbitant bills due to security breaches when using platforms like Vercel and Netlify.

What does the speaker believe about the convenience offered by low-code services?

The speaker argues that the perceived convenience of low-code services is outweighed by the potential pain and costs associated with their unreliability.

How does the speaker feel about no-code tools in general?

The speaker appreciates no-code tools for their efficiency but stresses that they do not replace the need for deeper coding solutions in serious applications.

What is the speaker's stance on coding and infrastructure management?

The speaker believes that understanding and managing infrastructure directly, though initially daunting, is not as complicated as it seems and can ultimately save money.