Pros of free-for-dev

• More comprehensive list of free resources across various categories
• Regularly updated with new services and offerings
• Includes a wider range of developer tools and services

Cons of free-for-dev

• Less structured organization compared to stack-on-a-budget
• May be overwhelming for beginners due to the sheer number of options
• Lacks detailed explanations or guides for using the listed services

Code comparison

While both repositories primarily consist of markdown files listing resources, free-for-dev includes a contributing guide with specific formatting instructions:

# free-for-dev contributing guide

* [Category Name](#category-name)
  * [Service Name](http://link-to-service.com/) - Short description, no more than 100 characters

stack-on-a-budget doesn't have a specific contributing guide, but follows a similar format in its main README:

<!-- menu -->
## Table of Contents

* [Analytics](#analytics)
* [App hosting](#app-hosting)
* [Authentication](#authentication)

Both repositories use markdown to organize their content, but free-for-dev has a more standardized approach to contributions, which may contribute to its larger and more frequently updated list of resources.

Pros of public-apis

• Extensive collection of APIs covering a wide range of categories
• Regularly updated with new APIs and community contributions
• Includes details like authentication requirements and HTTPS support

Cons of public-apis

• Focuses solely on APIs, not other budget-friendly development resources
• May include APIs that are not necessarily free or have limited free tiers
• Less emphasis on cost-saving strategies for developers

Code comparison

While a direct code comparison isn't applicable, here's an example of how each repository might be used:

stack-on-a-budget:

## Database
* [Firebase](https://firebase.google.com/) - Realtime database, authentication, hosting. Free for small-scale projects.

public-apis:

| API | Description | Auth | HTTPS | CORS |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| Firebase | Google Firebase Cloud Messaging | `apiKey` | Yes | Unknown |

stack-on-a-budget provides a curated list of free tiers for various development tools and services, focusing on cost-effective solutions for developers. It covers a broader range of resources beyond just APIs.

public-apis, on the other hand, offers a comprehensive collection of public APIs, making it easier for developers to find and integrate external services into their projects. It provides more detailed information about each API but doesn't necessarily focus on free or budget-friendly options.

Both repositories serve different purposes and can be valuable resources for developers depending on their specific needs.

Pros of the-book-of-secret-knowledge

• Broader scope, covering a wide range of topics beyond just budget-friendly services
• More comprehensive, with a larger collection of resources and tools
• Includes advanced topics and "secret" knowledge for experienced developers

Cons of the-book-of-secret-knowledge

• Less focused on specific budget constraints, which may be less helpful for those with limited resources
• Can be overwhelming due to the sheer amount of information provided
• May require more time to navigate and find relevant information

Code Comparison

While both repositories primarily consist of curated lists and don't contain significant code samples, here's a comparison of their README structures:

stack-on-a-budget:

## Table of Contents
- [Analytics](#analytics)
- [App Testing](#app-testing)
- [Authentication](#authentication)
...

the-book-of-secret-knowledge:

<br>

<p align="center">
  <a href="https://github.com/trimstray/the-book-of-secret-knowledge">
    <img src="https://github.com/trimstray/the-book-of-secret-knowledge/blob/master/static/img/the-book-of-secret-knowledge-preview.png">
  </a>
</p>

<br>

<p align="center">&nbsp;<i>Knowledge is powerful, be careful how you use it!</i></p>

Both repositories use Markdown for organization, but the-book-of-secret-knowledge has a more visually appealing header with an image and centered text.

Pros of Best-websites-a-programmer-should-visit

• Broader scope, covering various aspects of programming and career development
• Includes resources for multiple programming languages and technologies
• Offers a more comprehensive list of learning resources and tools

Cons of Best-websites-a-programmer-should-visit

• Less focused on specific budget-friendly services for building applications
• May be overwhelming for beginners due to the large number of resources
• Lacks detailed information about pricing or free tiers for services

Code Comparison

While both repositories primarily consist of markdown files with lists of resources, there isn't significant code to compare. However, here's a brief example of how they structure their markdown:

Best-websites-a-programmer-should-visit:

## Index
* [Interview Preparation](#interview-preparation)
* [Machine Learning](#machine-learning)
* [Deep Learning](#deep-learning)

stack-on-a-budget:

<!-- TOC depthFrom:2 -->
- [Analytics, Events and Statistics](#analytics-events-and-statistics)
- [APIs, Data and ML](#apis-data-and-ml)
- [Application hosting](#application-hosting)

Both repositories use markdown to organize their content, but stack-on-a-budget uses a more structured table of contents approach with HTML comments for better navigation.

Pros of design-resources-for-developers

• More comprehensive, covering a wider range of design-related resources
• Includes tools for UI/UX, fonts, colors, and stock photos
• Regularly updated with new resources and community contributions

Cons of design-resources-for-developers

• Less focused on budget-friendly options
• May overwhelm users with too many choices
• Not specifically tailored for developers building full-stack applications

Code comparison

While both repositories are primarily resource lists, they don't contain significant code samples. However, here's a comparison of their README structures:

design-resources-for-developers:

## Table of Contents
- [UI Graphics](#ui-graphics)
- [Fonts](#fonts)
- [Colors](#colors)
...

stack-on-a-budget:

<!-- TOC -->
- [Analytics](#analytics)
- [App hosting](#app-hosting)
- [Authentication](#authentication)
...

Both use a table of contents, but design-resources-for-developers organizes content by design categories, while stack-on-a-budget focuses on service types for application development.

Pros of awesome-selfhosted

• Extensive list of self-hosted software options across various categories
• Active community with frequent updates and contributions
• Includes detailed information about each project, including demo links and license types

Cons of awesome-selfhosted

• Focuses solely on self-hosted solutions, which may require more technical expertise
• Can be overwhelming due to the large number of options presented
• Doesn't provide information on free tiers or pricing for cloud-based alternatives

Code comparison

While both repositories are primarily curated lists, they don't contain significant code samples. However, here's an example of how they structure their lists:

stack-on-a-budget:

- [Service Name](link)
  - Free tier: description of free offering
  - Limitations: any restrictions or caps

awesome-selfhosted:

- [Project Name](link) - Brief description. (`License` `Language`)

Both repositories serve different purposes: stack-on-a-budget focuses on free tiers of cloud services, while awesome-selfhosted emphasizes self-hosted alternatives. The choice between them depends on whether you prefer cloud-based solutions with free tiers or have the resources and expertise to self-host your applications and services.