Comparison to alternatives is misleading

https://github.com/typesense/typesense-website/blob/bdbcc64a8b543bd29f36cffc8efc2c2708a8f4b8/docs-site/content/overview/comparison-with-alternatives.md?plain=1#L40

While this was true for Algolia but not anymore, it never was the case with Meilisearch.

https://github.com/typesense/typesense-website/blob/bdbcc64a8b543bd29f36cffc8efc2c2708a8f4b8/docs-site/content/overview/comparison-with-alternatives.md?plain=1#L42-L43

In assessing the readiness of a product, one could argue that it hinges on having users in production who experience satisfactory service quality. By that measure, we currently boast a user base of over 20,000 individuals utilizing the open-source edition, coupled with over 1,000 users on our cloud platform. Most of these users actively employ the software in live environments, often handling substantial datasets. Furthermore, we would appreciate you clarifying your definition of "large datasets." Notably, we have clients leveraging Meilisearch for datasets exceeding 100 million documents. This is a considerable scale for most users. We would appreciate your perspective on this matter.

Open docs-site/content/overview/comparison-with-alternatives.md and review the statements around lines 40 and 42-43. Check the claims about Algolia, Meilisearch, product readiness, user counts, and dataset size against the issue, then update the comparison so it is not misleading. Done means those cited statements accurately reflect the reported context.