first impressions: tail should be more friendly + should be able to pull logs + ....

[0x33dm]

Sorry to create one mixed issue, just wanted to give some feedback as someone who used heroku for a long time and saw your "render VS Heroku" article and thought it would be worth giving it a try.

Sorry if I missed something, I just spent an hour or two deploying a test deploy on render.

Compared to "heroku" I noticed a few things:

1. you can't tail a service without knowing its "id", that's very counterproductive as the name of the deployment is very easy to remember, but the id is impossible. A few other commands I tried on the command line ended up with me having to look for a deploy "id" as opposed to just typing the deploy name which is easy to memorize.

2. there is no "render service logs" to pull like the last 100 lines of a log or so, the tail function also doesn't show logs before I asked to tail, so it's hard to check what just happened if you had the terminal closed when it happened.

3. render asked me to get an API KEY on the dashboard instead of following the regular flow that command line apps like "heroku login" do

4. render using colours on the command line seems a bit OTT ( personal opinion of course )

5. every deploy on Heroku will have it's own IP address, at least for all I know when creating multiple deploys they never go out with the same outbound IP which can be very beneficial in some applications

Compared to vercel:

1. One of the things I love the most on vercel is the "preview deployment", so as soon as you create a PR they spin a temporary environment and provide a ( login protected ) preview environment, so other people can try it out while reviewing the PRs