[dstpierre]

Hi there,

I'd like to request feedback on my product. I started building in last January with great momentum, but the pandemic made things a bit complicated.

As someone that built a dozen of SaaS in the last decades, there were some aspects of the backend I was bored of rewriting. User management is probably the major one.

I've tried Firebase and admit I found it interesting for 4-5 days, but as a Go backend developer, it did not suit my need/taste.

Why not try something just for me. At first, I called it "ezbackend" and built a dirty prototype in Node. I played with rewriting it in Go and started to like where it was headed. In January 2020, I thought that it might interest others, so I renamed the project, made it more rebust, and kept adding the minimal feature sets I personally wanted.

I'm now near the v1 / official launch, and I'd like to get some thoughts. I know it's not for everyone. To be perfectly honest, I'm not 100% clear who might be interested, but I'm excited enough to build side projects on top of it, it's enough for me to build it.

Any feedback is greatly appreciated.

[hmsimha]

Looks cool to me. I like the more flexible tiers, not sure why others are suggesting slimming them down.

I assume "unlocking" the backend and getting the source code gets you something in Go then, but I didn't see more information about exactly what you get with that option. What frameworks, technologies, etc. Is the API described in Swagger/OpenAPI? What DB? If I use staticbackend, but then I want to write my own backend, can I export my user DB without paying the $10,000? Does the $10,000 even include the User DB!?

[nicoburns]

It seems like a decent concept. I think the main problem is that you have two competitors (nhost and superbase) that are doing the same thing but better. In particular:

1. Their stacks are mostly open source, so you can truly self host with no cost at all if and when you need to.

2. They're building on top of Postgres so you get the full power of a SQL database. Plus they both have realtime solutions ready to go.

[dstpierre]

Yes, I discover nhost a couple of months ago when the founder replied on a post I made in IndieHackers. I was not aware of both before.

My goal with StaticBackend is to go more in dept in features like sending emails, Stripe payments. Features that a SaaS / web app typically need in the backend.

I'll not stop at Database and WebSocket. I'd like to go further based on demand. I'm building more a backend teamate for frontend developers.

I recognize that my choice of using a Document database instead of an RDBMS can be argued. But one as to make choices.

Thanks for your comment.

[nicoburns]

I would suggest that quality is much more important than quantity/breadth here. I would use such a service to save me time, but it will only save me time if it's rock solid and very actively maintained. Otherwise I'd much rather just build my own.

[dstpierre]

yes totally. that's why I'm focusing on simple implementation and not planning on adding anything yet. I planning on building real-world SaaS examples to showcase the capabilities.

[slow_donkey]

Conversely, renewed competition may also be a good sign that there's a market for such products. You do need a place to differentiate, fortunately the surface area of the problem is fairly broad.

As an example, look at low-code for inspiration to determine what features people need which aren't being filled by existing solutions. Hopefully that reduces the need to compete via feature checklist.

[dstpierre]

yes, this is the vision I have for short-mid terms. But I won't be adding anything soon. The long-term differentiation will be clearer once there's early adopters I think.