As someone who (unfortunately) used Meteor in the past I disagree. IMO from a dev perspective Meteor was just a poorly implemented promise at 0-effort real-time functionality on top of a database you were at the time (~2015) already interested in or using. It compounded all the problems of MongoDB with a non-perfect abstraction and javascript framework.
Whatever Postgres in WASM ends up being used for there's no way it repeats all those circumstances - at minimum Postgres is just a more appropriate tool then MongoDB circa 2015.
Nah I think Supabase will do well. Meteor also did well all things considered. My point is really that they are revisiting all the same technology and product decisions and coming to the same conclusions.
There's only one way to architect a PaaS. Next.js and Vercel's offerings are, essentially, also the same.
The real risk is having one person build it all. They have a team but not really. Personally I believe that's a good risk to take.
But I think it will take a powerful psychological toll to operate this way, having to pretend to have a team (because investors like teams and not solo founders), having to pretend this isn't Meteor (because investors don't like being reminded of "losers"), etc. etc.
Like downvote random Internet comments all you want, but actually I think it's a great idea to have one person do "Better Meteor," it's not my fault investors don't.
Member mini mongo?
Supabase will be Meteor in no time.