Earlier quoted context omitted.
I understand it very well, and relate closely to the author's mixture of feelings. It's overwhelming and intimidating to be reminded that there's a bunch of stuff you ostensibly should be using, or at least researching and evaluating and deciding not to use.
I'm not sure you should be researching this stuff unless you have a real problem to solve.
SaaS We Happily Pay For
211–220 of 229 posts
Re: SaaS We Happily Pay For
#212Earlier quoted context omitted.
Does the same on Chrome on an iPhone 8. Interesting.
Apple mandates WebKit as only allowed browser engine. If a page crashes iOS the error is likely in engine itself so it doesn't really matter what "browser" you actually use.
Re: SaaS We Happily Pay For
#213Earlier quoted context omitted.
"Netflix is $10/m, so why would I buy Mailbrew" No, that's not the argument being made though. The argument is 'why is a team of 3 paying 3x$10 to 'schedule meetings'. There's only 3 people, i.e. a reasonable questioning of the value being made. Honestly, $10 is not that much, but why on earth would it be needed is a fair question.
That's not really the argument either. If you cost $100/hour, it only takes 6 minutes of saved time per month to pay back for it. Plus lost opportunity if a potential customer doesn't schedule the call with you. Reducing the friction to talk to customers is pretty big in my books. The question is if the value you get out of the service is higher than what you pay for.
100/h is noce. It is so much nocer if it is going for a year, decade.
If you are worth $100/h but are not getting paid - that is you have cash flow problems, then these are a lot of SaaS to be paying for.
That is a oversimplification but it is (almost) all about cash flow in a small business just getting going
Re: SaaS We Happily Pay For
#214SavvyCal looks interesting, but for a "lean operation" can you really justify paying $12 per month per user for a service to schedule meetings? All of GSuite starts at $6/mo, and already does this.
You really can’t say if they can justify it or not. Only they can. If I can save 15 minutes per day, that would more than pay for $12/month. Time is your most valuable asset.
Time is a flow not a stock. It is only worth what you get paid for it.
Re: SaaS We Happily Pay For
#215An alternative to Vercel and more budget friendly is AWS Amplify console. Costs just a few cents per build, connects with GitHub and you have multiple environments. I’ve had a decent experience - though far from perfect, justifies the cost.
It was a bit confusing getting all the per branch/commit deployments behind a password so that added another 10 minutes...
Very pleased with it.
Re: SaaS We Happily Pay For
#216Re: SaaS We Happily Pay For
#217Linear looks fascinating. We’re using Zenhub now and it’s slow and misused in our org (one giant project board instead of separate boards per repo / project). Curious if anyone here is / has used linear and could compare their experience with it to Monday, Asana or Zenhub?
The one piece that's probably missing is a tie in to broader "roadmapping" software - I know what's coming in the next 3 sprints, but we haven't found a way to intuitively tie this to our 12-month roadmap - well automatically anyway.
Re: SaaS We Happily Pay For
#218the linear.app website crashes safari/ios when you zoom in on the first image (the one showing the app)
the homepage uses server rendered Next.js/React which pushes the boundaries of modern web dev. Not surprising. But I still think it's the future once it's more stable.
But I'm biases as a Vue/frontend dev
Re: SaaS We Happily Pay For
#219Re: SaaS We Happily Pay For
#220If you go to that Linear one’s site on an iPhone and zoom in really fast on their image of the todo list client, it immediately restarts your phone.