Thanks for the feedback. We hear from a lot of devs with fond memories of Gatsby but if it cuts the opposite way for you that's also fair!
Most of us spent a lot of the last decade building Gatsby so it's sort of a personal identity/pride thing for us more than a marketing thing. But maybe we need to keep our identity small! Either way, thanks for saying something, worth thinking about.
I don’t mean to be provocative, but given that it’s in the title of the post, of course I checked whether the marketing page for this framework was built with Gatsby - seems like it’s Next.js though. Any reason Gatsby was not chosen if it’s a point of pride?
Re: Tanstack AI, really depends on adoption. We've known Tanner since his react-static days and if it takes off we'll def work together.
Re: Mastra cloud -- this is basically hosted services, eg observability, hosted studio, hosted serverless deployments, as distinct from the framework.
With server adapters you can now deploy your studio in your infra. We're going to pull multi-project / multi-user Mastra cloud features into a Mastra admin feature so you can run these locally or deploy them on your infra as well (with EE licensing for stuff like RBAC). Stay tuned here.
Have a ton of respect for the AI SDK team. Initially we only used AI SDK model routing, but now we also have our own built-in model routing as well.
I see each of us having different architectures. AI SDK is more low-level, and Mastra is more integrated with storage powering our studio, evals, memory, workflow suspend/resume etc.
What a corporate and wishy washy response that just basically repeated what I said back at me.
I was hoping to actually engage with you but I guess you just came here to do marketing.
> AI SDK is more low-level
AI SDK was more low level. My question was, since the latest V6 release is moving towards higher level components, what do you think about that? How will you continue to differentiate your product if Vercel makes moves to eat your lunch?
That's almost certainly their intention here, following their highly successful Next.js playbook: start by creating low level dev tools, gradually expand the scope, make sure that all the docs and setup guides you towards deploying on their infrastructure.
It's a mix of savvy and diplomacy to neither attack a competitor in the open nor be forced to reveal their strategic way of thinking into your way of viewing things. This is not a winner take all space. Corporate yes but you can be more self aware yourself.
We've always supported letting folks specify their agent hierarchy, eg agent supervisor, workflow orchestrator, mix and match, etc.
But people kept asking us for a multi-agent primitive out of the box so we shipped `agent.network()`, which is basically dynamic hierarchy decided at runtime, pass in an array of workflows and agents to the routing agent and let it decide what to do, how long to execute for, etc!
Less frequently sites and more frequently a SaaS app, for example Sanity released a content agent in their CMS, Factorial released an agent inside their HR/payroll product.
But tons of other use cases too, eg dev teams at Workday and PayPal have built an agentic SRE to triage their alerts, etc etc
When Langchain was the only option rolling your own made a lot of sense!
These days we see things going the other way, where teams that started rolling their own shift over to Mastra so they can focus on the agent vs having to maintain an internal framework.
The Latent Space article swyx linked earlier includes a quote from the Brex CTO talking about how they did that.
reply