[thinkMOAR]

It is always easier to pay somebody else to do it? Whats the point you try to make? I never mentioned it is cheaper to do it yourself. And enterprise is certainly not for teams of 5 people, 'Starts At 50 Admin Members'

Setting up the statuspage.io, monitoring it, keeping things as they should, adding new stuff to monitor thats not a task one of those 5 will be doing regularly? And what if he does a poor job at that? You end up with what you say, the same buggy level of monitoring. So what _is_ the excuse not to make your own and pay significant amounts of money to a third party?

I say 18.000 is a lot of money for a service that reports your outages (good 3 month salary here, and in three months one can code a lot). And if you do it yourself you have all the freedom of choice how you monitor what you monitor how you report to your users instead of relying on the options statuspage.io offers, there is no limit

And why would your own monitoring be more buggy then some setup a third party deems to be ideal? You can make a perfect fit, gives you another view on your own products etc. Full control is key, in house solutions, not saving money.

[pc86]

> And enterprise is certainly not for teams of 5 people, 'Starts At 50 Admin Members'

I said 5 developers. My first job was on a team of ~12 developers for a company with 30,000 employees. Developer time was gold and as such the company often purchased products that we probably could have built in house given sufficient time.

> And if you do it yourself you have all the freedom of choice how you monitor what you monitor how you report to your users instead of relying on the options statuspage.io offers, there is no limit

If you need something an off-the-shelf option doesn't offer than you wouldn't be considering it in the first place. If you have truly odd requirements you're going to be forced to build your own anyway.

> And why would your own monitoring be more buggy then some setup a third party deems to be ideal?

StatusPage's Show HN was a little over 3.5 years ago. There's no way you can build something less buggy in 3 months. This is a perfect example of not only developer hubris and "Not Made Here" bias, but the problem of trying to estimate the time to walk up the coast[0].

[0] https://www.quora.com/Why-are-software-development-task-esti...

[thinkMOAR]

12 devs on 30.000 employees? This was an (IT related) company that would be a possible customer of statuspage.io? I have to admit i'm very curious what company, industry this was/is or services were provided. It's a strange balance 12 over 30000

And im curious if* you wouldn't have liked it more if you did have more time, resources, colleague to have had the chance to develop those things in house, yourself. And having another product to sell instead of buying a service from a (potential) competitor?

Also i doubt they have been coding for 3.5 years, and if their show HN was 3.5 years ago, very nice promotion for them. But that doesn't say anything about the quality of the product. From what i have been reading over the years from their development they are just integrators of already existing technology. So if you want me to integrate APIs for 3 months, i think i can get quite a long way.... by myself in the evening hours and weekend even.

They started with outsourcing most of their services used (mailgun for mail, twilio for sms, etc etc), so i rather develop something myself, (and yes in 3 months i can integrate a lot of 3rd party services via APIs). So if you prefer to OUTSOURCE, your service to a party that outsources their services again, and find this of a higher quality of service then* writing your own (which give you options to resell that product etc), then i think we just have different view of what quality is.

Nonetheless, weekend is coming, hope you have a good weekend :) probably in case of reply will read it only after