An unsuccessful project might be unsuccessful because it got eaten by costs before it became successful.
A wildly successful project is risky to migrate.
An unsuccessful project might be unsuccessful because it got eaten by costs before it became successful.
A wildly successful project is risky to migrate.
Most startups fail. Optimizing for getting revenue is more important than optimizing cost in the beginning.
If you get revenue you can solve the cost problem. If you don’t, it doesn’t matter.
Anything that gives you more shots at the goal is a win in a startup.
If not, then it’s poor price controls.
IIUC Pieter Levels talks a lot about not prematurely optimizing engineering solutions because most ideas will flop.
I've seen many colleagues bootstrap something - even if they're not themselves very technical - because they've leveraged these well integrated low cost platforms.
I think it’s rare that fails to show potential because of the underlying technology that’s chosen.
Sure, Vercel is relatively expensive. But I just don’t see how you’d throw in the towel because the costs are too high without first evaluating how to lower them.
If you’re saying that the evaluation is likely to show that you’re stuck - I have never seen that be the case personally.