Re: Bringing attention to the End of Life for Webhooks

I understand why Quickbase would want to get rid of the webhook feature, but it is definitely a step in the wrong direction for several reasons.

1. Lack of Collaboration and Visibility: Pipelines lack the cross-team collaboration and visibility inherent in webhooks. To replace webhooks, pipelines need shared access among admins and a comprehensive view of related pipelines for efficient maintenance.

2. Synchronous Execution: Webhooks offer synchronous execution, ensuring instant response to events, unlike pipelines which might introduce delays.

3. Efficient Bulk Updates: Webhooks excel in handling bulk updates efficiently, minimizing overhead by repeating actions in a single api call.

4. Slow Pipeline Building: Pipeline construction can be sluggish compared to webhooks, potentially hindering productivity in complex workflows. The number of seconds waiting for a dropdown to load or a field to populate really hinders the builders' flow. 

4. Cost Considerations: Webhook calls to outside servers incur fewer costs compared to pipelines, where every HTTP call uses an account step. 

5. API Integrations: Webhooks have a limited, but useful API control via the legacy XML API. There is no such API control for pipelines.

In essence, while Quickbase's decision to phase out webhooks may seem logical from a business perspective, it overlooks crucial functionalities vital for efficient workflow management. Enhancing pipeline capabilities to match the efficiency and performance of webhooks should be prioritized before ending webhook support.

------------------------------
Bradley
------------------------------