Show HN: Sitebulb, a website crawler and auditor for SEOs

> Email confirmation is required for the username/password, which is how free and trial licenses are controlled, and ultimately how paid licenses are doled out. So we need it for the licensing.

If you are interested in getting more free users into the app to try it, I would suggest to rework the licencing stuff a bit to enable the usage without email, but at least without confirmation. Should be worth the effort, and you can still require login when swicthing from free/trial to paid.

> Crawl Maps is not linked - you mean on the website right? I'll fix that.

Yep, no link in the feature dropdown.

> Running audits show on the main Dashboard, seemed kinda overkill to put it on Recent Audits as well. No?

Maybe. I like structure, so was expecting it to be shown a level down from the Dashboard somewhere as well.

> You can switch of 'Check external' in the Advanced Settings. Kinda 'hidden away' to keep the main settings UI cleaner (otherwise where does it end?!)

Ok, I think I am biased because I usually use a tool that is "internal only" by default.

> - "Filtered URL Lists" - they are there because people want them ('a big list of all the URLs') and kept missing them in our usability tests!

Umm, ok. "Crawled URLs" maybe?

> Why no endless scrolling in tables? It's not easy to do because the data is written to disk, rather than stored in RAM (which is the reason it can typically crawl more pages), so it needs to go and fetch/filter/etc... every time.

If some websites can do it with a request to the server each time the next results are loaded, I am sure you can also do that with whatever local database you use ;)

Regular updates = expensive to develop = monthly or yearly fees = reduced/eliminated concept of ownership.

> The expectation of updating also seems to be making the software industry even more slipshod and crappy, with a just ship it now ans fix it later attitude.

Possibly. Or it's the other way around: Companies don't get all the money upfront and have to continue to deliver. Otherwise they get complains, bad ratings and customer churn.

> But that would require competence and forethought.

And much bigger wallets from consumers. I think most people wouldn't pay a few hundred bucks nowadays for an operating system, or for MS Office, or Photoshop. And surely not for most software these days: apps.

Don't get me wrong. Your points are valid, but I think the market has spoken. People want software that continues to work on the newest OS. They want new features, compatibility and whatnot.

Back in the day, you bought Office 2000 and knew it'd be outdated at some point in time. Your Windows XP Professional you bought for 200 bucks is worthless today. Try using Photoshop 5 – works on your XP machine I guess – but can't open files from other designers.

Software 10-15 years ago was delivered once. Updates were an annoyance. But the upfront cost could still be divided through the number of months you actually used the software – and for most software, it's probably not that much different from the monthly subscription or yearly license fee you have today.