I use nestjs in my open source no-code database https://github.com/teableio/teable, and I really like it, especially the dependency injection capability.
Teable can currently share forms to get data from external users. You can also integrate with other lowcode tools to build external application interfaces
This pun is interesting; the 'new' in Teable is literally the 'e'. I've addressed the product comparison questions in a public reply, hoping it's helpful.
In the comments, everyone is interested in the core differences between Teable and similar products. Here, I'll compare the products mentioned. Please note that since I'm not a deep user of the other products, there might be inaccuracies, and I welcome corrections.
Grist
I had heard of Grist before but never actually experienced it. A quick look at Grist through videos showed that its dynamic spreadsheet capabilities are incredibly powerful, complete with fixed field types, making it excellent for organizing structured data. It seems to have an edge in flexibility, and compared to Airtable, it might be more akin to Smartsheet.
According to its official documentation, Grist's Pro Plan offers up to 100k rows, indicating that queries and calculations are processed on the frontend or in memory, which typically makes it challenging to scale data rows further. This is a problem that Airtable also faces.
Baserow and NocoDB,
my impression is that Baserow's features are relatively more stable, and it started commercializing earlier, being among the first batch of open-source Airtable alternatives.
Baserow initially had a limit on the number of rows, but this year's updates seem to have significantly increased its data capacity. Notably, Baserow does not support Bring Your Own Database or query by SQL, but it offers a seamless scrolling table interface, unlike NocoDB, which requires pagination. In terms of other functionalities, both have their strengths. My assessment aligns with what I found on Baserow's official forum and comparisons with NocoDB.
Teable
Compared to similar products, Teable invests heavily in its table format UI, striving for seamless scrolling, copy-pasting, batch editing, and other quick table operations, which we believe are key to saving users' time. Therefore, we developed our Canvas table rendering component to achieve perfection. Meanwhile, batch operations pose a significant challenge for database compatibility, but we see this as a necessary investment.
Additionally, Teable supports developers by offering open database connections and database permission management, a concept inspired by Supabase. This allows both developers and users to create on the same platform.
What we think the future of no-code products look like
1. An interface that anyone can use to build applications easily.
2. Easy access to data, letting users grab, move, and reuse their information as they wish.
3. Data privacy and choice, whether that's in the cloud, on-premise, or even just on your local.
4. It needs to work for developers too, not just non-tech users.
5. It should handle lots of data, so it can grow with your business.
6. Flexibility to integrate with other software, combining strengths to get the job done.
7. Native AI integration to takes data automation to a whole new level.
I'm a big believer in easy no code abstractions without black box restrictions on the code underneath, particularly for "power users" who run into the limitations of no code tools after a few iterations (particularly on a cost per function level).
I am just dabbling in nocode platforms, so far I only spent an evening per solution: undb, baserow, nocodb. Nocodb has an url and an email field type that enforces URL and email. Do you plan to add something like that ?
In all honesty, don't. Seriously, this is bad advice. Nobody is going to visit your website and say "woah, this looks like Attio's website - I'm out!" with, evidently, the exception of a few folks from Attio. The website looks good, you and the other company aren't truly direct competitors so branding conflicts are not much of a concern, and if you both truly just derived your designs from a root common theme then I don't know why this is even being brought up here, unless the other commenters were unaware that their design was derived from a template. There are undoubtedly things significantly more worth spending time on as a very early startup then redesigning your website to appease a few people on HN, who were (assuming the common template bit is true) in the wrong for raising this issue to begin with and and should be updating their comment with this context.
EDIT - apologies, the OP here is not from Attio which was my assumption and would've made the OP's post unnecessary but an understandable reflex to seeing a doppelganger of their own website. If you check the OP's profile to see which company they're _actually_ from you will certainly realize that this entire comment chain should be fully ignored. It's pretty shitty, actually.
I think I was pretty open in my comment (cofounder).
They copied Attio's SVG image and everything. My issue was not the aesthetics but the fact they copied another organization's work. Surely, you don't think that's right?
Are you serious, man? You edited your comment, twice. We both know your comment did not include "(cofounder)", but did include unnecessary jabs at your your competitor ("this makes me lose all faith in our credibility.") when you posted it. I've used Budibase and think it's a great product, and couldn't have anything but respect for the people behind it. You're above this.
EDIT - Apologies, you did indeed include "(cofounder)" in your original post, I just missed it (based on bing's cached page.) Regardless, this is not the way to deal with competitors, and frankly your product speaks for itself. And perhaps obscene amounts of torrenting in my teenage years has permanently skewed my moral compass for these things, but I really don't care about table cell background svg theft.
