I get different results on this too but to the same effect. At least macOS still gives you all options underneath whereas Windows 10 will just not show you anything sometimes
It depends on how many containers you want to run, if you have a lot of low memory requirement containers then it'd be significantly more expensive on Hyper.sh
Sure, it always depends on the workload. You could also argue that if you want to run applications in containers you'd be better off using Hyper.sh than 'wasting' cycles running your own Docker daemon + scheduler on top of another provider.
If you can describe your workload I'd be curious to do a comparison.
Have you tried using watchify [1] to speed up your builds in development? I've also been using browserify-hmr [2] which is working nicely for hot module replacement and found it easier to setup than Webpack's hmr.
I think one of Webpack's benefits is that this stuff is all bundled with it, so everyone's using it but with browserify you need to go out and find these solutions yourself
I've been running browserify under grunt and by itself, both using watchify, and I have no complaints. I came from just grunt, and a bunch of different tasks like concat, uglify, etc. Browserify has been a revelation, way faster compilation times, way less config, way fewer installed packages. Definitely give it a go again.