I don't think I've been very transparent about all of work happening around usage controls and pricing at Vercel. So I'd like to do that now. The tl;dr of the feedback is: more visibility into usage and more ways to control spending. And I think I haven't done a job good about acknowledging this is very top of mind for me. Here's the problem. Hobbyists don't want to wake up to a large unexpected bill. That's serverless in it's worst form. But at the same time, businesses don't want to wake up to their site offline. How do you build a platform that works for both of these customers? I have a tendency to wait unto the problem is fixed and then tell the story of the journey to get there. This might not be the right approach. The silence in between the problem and solution can be painful. So, here's my current thought: if I'm a hobbyist, I'm okay with my site going offline if it was going to exceed [X] number of $. That's basically how the free tier works today. You either stay within limits, move to a paid tier, or your site goes offline. If I'm running a business, I never want my site to go offline. I want to tightly control and monitor my spend, adjusting usage as needed. I want lots of controls to prevent bad actors from incurring usage. One thing we're imminently launching is automatic recursion prevention in your functions. Mistakes happen, and you shouldn't get charged for invalid usage. If anyone wants to chat more about this, shoot me a DM. We're starting to ship more usage / pricing controls and will continue to iterate forward based on feedback.

The @nextjs App Router now supports static exports! Start with a static site / SPA, then later upgrade to use server features. It now also supports static i18n routing and static API Routes (with Route Handlers). Now available on `canary`, soon stable! beta.nextjs.org/docs/configu…