[mccorrinall]

My guess: Their motivation is probably that they used a SaaS product, which was totally overpriced for what value it provided and they want to show that they can do it better for cheaper.

Anyway, what exactly is the use of this compared to just using uWS straight away? It’s build on uWS, so this is basically just a pusher implementation and some notification features with cool branding?

[rennokki]

> My guess: Their motivation is probably that they used a SaaS product, which was totally overpriced for what value it provided and they want to show that they can do it better for cheaper.

Yes, and what I replied earlier in this thread: I'm not the only one having this issue with overpriced Pusher, I just dont want to be limited by Pusher on how many messages I wanna distribute to my end users.

> Anyway, what exactly is the use of this compared to just using uWS straight away? It’s build on uWS, so this is basically just a pusher implementation and some notification features with cool branding?

uWS is cool to be used in any WebSocket client. However, Pusher has a strict protocol, so I wanted a product that works with any Pusher SDK - so I won't have to rely on custom clients or something of that ilk.