Appwrite vs Parse

Overview

Parse

Stacks537

Followers479

Votes601

Appwrite

Stacks84

Followers167

Votes69

GitHub Stars53.4K

Forks4.8K

Appwrite vs Parse: What are the differences?

Introduction

In this Markdown code, we will provide the key differences between Appwrite and Parse, two popular backend as a service (BaaS) platforms.

Scalability: Appwrite is designed to scale horizontally, allowing users to scale their applications without any limits. It uses task queues and serverless functions to handle the workload efficiently. On the other hand, Parse is limited in terms of scalability and has a fixed limit on the number of requests it can handle.
Customization: Appwrite provides a high level of customization, allowing developers to modify and extend its functionalities to meet their specific requirements. With its modular structure and open-source nature, Appwrite enables developers to add new services, plugins, and integrations easily. Parse, on the other hand, offers limited customization options, making it more suitable for simple and standard applications.
Hosting: Appwrite offers built-in support for cloud hosting, allowing users to deploy their applications directly from the platform. It provides native support for popular cloud providers like AWS, Google Cloud, and DigitalOcean. In contrast, Parse lacks built-in hosting support and requires users to set up their own infrastructure for deployment.
Authentication: Appwrite provides token-based authentication, supporting popular authentication methods like email/password login, OAuth, and API keys. It also allows users to add custom authentication methods easily. Parse, on the other hand, primarily relies on session-based authentication, which may be less flexible for certain use cases.
Real-time capabilities: Appwrite provides real-time functionality through its websocket-based Pub/Sub system. This enables real-time data synchronization and updates, making it suitable for applications that require real-time communication. Parse, on the other hand, lacks built-in support for real-time capabilities and may require additional libraries or services for achieving similar functionality.
Pricing: Appwrite offers a more flexible and transparent pricing model, allowing users to pay for the resources they consume. It provides a pay-as-you-go model, which can be more cost-effective for applications with varying traffic patterns. Parse, on the other hand, has a fixed pricing structure with predefined plans, which may not be ideal for applications with unpredictable or fluctuating usage.

In summary, Appwrite provides better scalability, customization options, hosting support, authentication methods, real-time capabilities, and pricing flexibility compared to Parse.

Share your Stack

Help developers discover the tools you use. Get visibility for your team's tech choices and contribute to the community's knowledge.

View Docs

CLI (Node.js)

Manual

Detailed Comparison

Parse	Appwrite
With Parse, you can add a scalable and powerful backend in minutes and launch a full-featured app in record time without ever worrying about server management. We offer push notifications, social integration, data storage, and the ability to add rich custom logic to your app’s backend with Cloud Code.	Appwrite's open-source platform lets you add Auth, DBs, Functions and Storage to your product and build any application at any scale, own your data, and use your preferred coding languages and tools.
Store basic data types, locations, photos;Update over the air;Data browser lets you manage, search, and update content without writing a single line of code;Push Console allows you to send notifications directly from the Parse web interface;Connect your users via traditional logins or third party social networks with just a few lines of code;Add rich, custom logic to your app’s backend without servers with Cloud Code;Integrate with virtually any third-party service using Cloud Modules	Authentication;Databases;Storage;Functions;Fast and Secure ;Manage Access control;File Previews; Image Manipulations;Authenticate, Confirm and Manage your Users;Multiple Signin Methods;Auto-Generated SSL;Built-in Files and Secrets Encryption;Serverless Functions;Built-in Anti-Virus scanner;Webhooks;Background Tasks;Open-Source;Self-Hosted;Privacy;Cross-Platform;Flutter Support;Audit Logging;Input Validation;Abuse Protection;HTTP\2 Support
Statistics
GitHub Stars -	GitHub Stars 53.4K
GitHub Forks -	GitHub Forks 4.8K
Stacks 537	Stacks 84
Followers 479	Followers 167
Votes 601	Votes 69
Pros & Cons
Pros 118 Easy setup 78 Free hosting 62 Well-documented 52 Cheap 47 Use push notifications in 3 lines of code	Pros 10 Great UI 8 100% open source 7 Easy to setup 6 End to end solution 5 Consistency across platforms
Integrations
New Relic Mailgun Mandrill CrowdFlower Twilio SendGrid Stripe Twilio Trigger.io	Kotlin Dart Swift Vue.js PHP Node.js Python JavaScript React Java

What are some alternatives to Parse, Appwrite?

Postman

It is the only complete API development environment, used by nearly five million developers and more than 100,000 companies worldwide.

Paw

Paw is a full-featured and beautifully designed Mac app that makes interaction with REST services delightful. Either you are an API maker or consumer, Paw helps you build HTTP requests, inspect the server's response and even generate client code.

Karate DSL

Combines API test-automation, mocks and performance-testing into a single, unified framework. The BDD syntax popularized by Cucumber is language-neutral, and easy for even non-programmers. Besides powerful JSON & XML assertions, you can run tests in parallel for speed - which is critical for HTTP API testing.

built.io

Built.io Backend is an mBaaS that allows you to avoid designing, building, and supporting a custom backend for your mobile & web applications. Enterprises can dramatically reduce cost, lower risk and accelerate time-to-market for apps.

Runscope

Keep tabs on all aspects of your API's performance with uptime monitoring, integration testing, logging and real-time monitoring.

Insomnia REST Client

Insomnia is a powerful REST API Client with cookie management, environment variables, code generation, and authentication for Mac, Window, and Linux.

RAML

RESTful API Modeling Language (RAML) makes it easy to manage the whole API lifecycle from design to sharing. It's concise - you only write what you need to define - and reusable. It is machine readable API design that is actually human friendly.

Apigee

API management, design, analytics, and security are at the heart of modern digital architecture. The Apigee intelligent API platform is a complete solution for moving business to the digital world.

Appcelerator

Appcelerator is the first mobile platform to combine the flexibility of open source development technologies with the power of cloud services.

DreamFactory

DreamFactory is an open source REST API backend for mobile, web, and IoT applications. It provides RESTful web services with pre-built connectors to SQL, NoSQL, file storage systems, and web services. It's secure, reusable, and offers live API documentation.

Related Comparisons

Bootstrap vs Materialize

Django vs Laravel vs Node.js

Bootstrap vs Foundation vs Material UI

Node.js vs Spring-Boot

Flyway vs Liquibase

Appwrite vs Parse: What are the differences?

Introduction

In this Markdown code, we will provide the key differences between Appwrite and Parse, two popular backend as a service (BaaS) platforms.

Scalability: Appwrite is designed to scale horizontally, allowing users to scale their applications without any limits. It uses task queues and serverless functions to handle the workload efficiently. On the other hand, Parse is limited in terms of scalability and has a fixed limit on the number of requests it can handle.
Customization: Appwrite provides a high level of customization, allowing developers to modify and extend its functionalities to meet their specific requirements. With its modular structure and open-source nature, Appwrite enables developers to add new services, plugins, and integrations easily. Parse, on the other hand, offers limited customization options, making it more suitable for simple and standard applications.
Hosting: Appwrite offers built-in support for cloud hosting, allowing users to deploy their applications directly from the platform. It provides native support for popular cloud providers like AWS, Google Cloud, and DigitalOcean. In contrast, Parse lacks built-in hosting support and requires users to set up their own infrastructure for deployment.
Authentication: Appwrite provides token-based authentication, supporting popular authentication methods like email/password login, OAuth, and API keys. It also allows users to add custom authentication methods easily. Parse, on the other hand, primarily relies on session-based authentication, which may be less flexible for certain use cases.
Real-time capabilities: Appwrite provides real-time functionality through its websocket-based Pub/Sub system. This enables real-time data synchronization and updates, making it suitable for applications that require real-time communication. Parse, on the other hand, lacks built-in support for real-time capabilities and may require additional libraries or services for achieving similar functionality.
Pricing: Appwrite offers a more flexible and transparent pricing model, allowing users to pay for the resources they consume. It provides a pay-as-you-go model, which can be more cost-effective for applications with varying traffic patterns. Parse, on the other hand, has a fixed pricing structure with predefined plans, which may not be ideal for applications with unpredictable or fluctuating usage.

In summary, Appwrite provides better scalability, customization options, hosting support, authentication methods, real-time capabilities, and pricing flexibility compared to Parse.