Supabase is on my shortlist for a BaaS provider if I was in the market for that and I read pretty much every article I see about it because I find it very interesting.
That said I can't take this article seriously based on the first paragraph.
> Each generation of software has corresponded with a different database provider. It started with Oracle and Ingres who battled for supremacy in the 1980s. Next came MongoDB in the 2000s, then Firebase and Parse in the 2010s.
Now I wasn't born until after the "Oracle/Ingress" period mentioned here but based on the next 2 periods mentioned I'm not sure how much to trust that either. Were Mongo/Firebase/Parse big? Absolutely and I played with them or at least followed them but to call them "This generation's database"? I'm sorry but just no.
Supabase is the closest to something I'd seriously build on top of out of the list here. Nothing against Mongo but I've always been more of a relational DB guy (DynamoDB being the exception and only recently) but Firebase and Parse always felt like outsized toys. They were really cool to play with but once things got more serious and you needed to do things outside the basic examples things fell down or got super complicated. Not to mention the skills needed to master Firebase or Parse feel very non-transferable, they are very specific to those platforms.
At least Supabase feels a little closer to the "metal" giving you a real Postgres DB, even so I'm still wary of going "all in" and, coming back to the initial purpose of this comment, I can't imaging calling it "this generation's database". If anything I'd call Postgres or MySQL/MariaDB (though this has seemed to fall out of favor over the last ~10 years) "this generation's database".
Supabase has certainly been on my radar and is cool... but I haven't seen any indication that it's even remotely as popular as "this generation's database".
That said I can't take this article seriously based on the first paragraph.
> Each generation of software has corresponded with a different database provider. It started with Oracle and Ingres who battled for supremacy in the 1980s. Next came MongoDB in the 2000s, then Firebase and Parse in the 2010s.
Now I wasn't born until after the "Oracle/Ingress" period mentioned here but based on the next 2 periods mentioned I'm not sure how much to trust that either. Were Mongo/Firebase/Parse big? Absolutely and I played with them or at least followed them but to call them "This generation's database"? I'm sorry but just no.
Supabase is the closest to something I'd seriously build on top of out of the list here. Nothing against Mongo but I've always been more of a relational DB guy (DynamoDB being the exception and only recently) but Firebase and Parse always felt like outsized toys. They were really cool to play with but once things got more serious and you needed to do things outside the basic examples things fell down or got super complicated. Not to mention the skills needed to master Firebase or Parse feel very non-transferable, they are very specific to those platforms.
At least Supabase feels a little closer to the "metal" giving you a real Postgres DB, even so I'm still wary of going "all in" and, coming back to the initial purpose of this comment, I can't imaging calling it "this generation's database". If anything I'd call Postgres or MySQL/MariaDB (though this has seemed to fall out of favor over the last ~10 years) "this generation's database".
Very odd article.