Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

I'm very surprised that a static site generator can raise this much capital, but it suggests to me that 1) the security dilemmas of non-static but content driven sites are still big enough to warrant adoption of this methodology 2) potentially, there is something they are doing right in this space.

I'd really like to know what 2 is as there's a lot of other options in this space that are also free, open source, and seem to accomplish the same thing. What is the Gatsby sauce?




Raising capital isn't success. Profitability is success.

I think the main value of Gatsby is the community-generated recipes to plug and play...but is there value here?

If you have one very generic application, then maybe you save time upfront. But you are tied into this heavy wrapper around React that will probably cause you problems down the line. And you probably still need a backend. So I am not sure what value is being created?

If you specifically need to generate lots of sites, or you have some performance requirement (and data that doesn't change often) then maybe. But I wouldn't use it to build anything complex (i.e. that would tie me into their product) because building an app isn't that much harder. I am sure there is a niche use but I think most people aren't doing anything complicated with it (I use it that way).

I also don't really see how this could be a Wordpress killer (which is the intent of the fundraising presumably). Wordpress is totally end-to-end, it abstracts away all the right parts. This doesn't. $15m won't change that.

In theory, I think applications like Prismic or Contentful (I think it is) actually break up these tasks better. From your app, you have a (usually) simple API. And it reflects the division of labour in most companies i.e. that code and content are separate (before anyone says it: they aren't offering a different product to Gatsby, if it seems that way then that is the point).


It doesn't look like Gatsby itself is what is the main selling point, and I'd argue, the VC doesn't think Gatsby itself is either.

Gatsby Preview / Gatsby Content Mesh is most likely the horse being bet on.


> Raising capital isn't success. Profitability is success.

Automattic just raised $300 million dollars a week or so ago.

One vision of success, I'm very sure, is getting acquired by Automattic.


2 - I'm not a developer, i just did a few wordpress themes, while looking at a static site generators i gave a try to gatsby because of the way it use images and it was a joy, i learned some javascript, discovered react, used a lots of things for the first time and it was just a great experience, lots of tools, good documentation, it was just fun for me.


> I'd really like to know what 2 is as there's a lot of other options in this space that are also free, open source, and seem to accomplish the same thing. What is the Gatsby sauce?

I just browsed around their site wondering the same thing, the conclusion I reached was that their main value proposition is the integrations they provide together with the automation and deployment pipeline as a service. But I must also say it is pretty unclear what you are actually buying with the $50/mo subscription; what do you get compared to just running the software on your laptop?


I've been using Gatsby to develop some sites and I suppose the benefit is you can largely develop like you would a frontend app and deploy like a static site. It is actually quite nice to use though the GraphQL takes a while to get used to.


It bakes in things that make the experience better. SPA routing and high lighthouse scores are nice, but if they take a lot of work to accomplish, they might not be worth it for a small media site. If they're as easy as WordPress, however, then you're giving WordPress some real competition.


I hear this, but is this a differentiator when compared to the other static site generators?

I was under the impression that Gatsby was just another interchangeable part of the so-called JAMstack...? Could you not get those wins using Pelican, or Hugo, or whatever?


> I'm very surprised that a static site generator can raise this much capital

Why?

They charge $50/mo and maybe the recurring revenue checks out for preferential investors to feel comfortable with making a profit. If Gatsby can get their service included in a bunch of the domain name registration sites, pushing out Wordpress, then they get exponentially more customers!

The real question is what they plan to do with the $15 million, followed by why the founders wanted to give up that much of the company as the revenue is probably fine. I don't think they actually are scaling majorly, except sales people. I think they are going to be subsidizing open source development, another developer day care shop that ideally will have the byproduct of making the tooling they use even more easy to use.

Any insight?


> If Gatsby can get their service included in a bunch of the domain name registration sites, pushing out Wordpress, then they get exponentially more customers!

I don't follow this reasoning. The hosting sites that offer Wordpress, offer it because it is free. GatsbyJS is free. The service offered by Gatsby is not. Given the difference between $0 and $50/month, I don't see Wordpress going away anytime soon.


How much of that $50/month do you think may be on offer to entice those hosting sites to try to upsell?




Guidelines | FAQ | Support | API | Security | Lists | Bookmarklet | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: