The author touches on this in the last section, but I'd reframe this a different way. The natural conclusion for a company who wants to funnel you to the app is, "the web version is a-OK? Let's make the web version worse."
I'd rather see this framed as, "if you don't have a high functioning web version, I don't need to use your service." Gimping my preferred medium will lose me as a customer. If enough people draw that line, "enshittifying" your web app should hurt your metrics, not help. That way maintaining a good web version is looked at as a long-term necessity, not a top of funnel.
I cannot get apps on my iPhone from anywhere else but the App Store. While they are dominant, Valve isn't locking anyone in even on their own hardware.
I'm willing to bet that many people produce code with Claude code that you would not be able to distinguish from a skilled human. Every tool has its uses and misuses.
Yeah, sorry I dont know a single engineer working outside of web development, on serious problems (that arent machine learning related) that think this about llm produced code.
The people saying this have already fried their engineering intuition by using agents (if they had any before) and are probably writing http handlers and identical (to every other llm generated) frontend landing pages all day everyday, for their next "indie SaaS product" (thats definitely not the 500th version of that product).
You're doing magic tricks on yourself, the equivalent of a toddler being entertained by the sound their vecro shoes make. Or more accurately, the a gambler behaves after they think they've become profitable.
As a home owner in Austin, I want my friends to be able to afford homes too and not feel like they have to move to have a yard and a family. Bring on the new construction.
> AWS doesn’t charge you in mysterious ways. It charges you in specific, predictable ways that nobody taught you to look for. That’s a knowledge gap. The purpose of this post is to shed some light on this.
Or it's a UX gap. If this is such a common complaint that's causing meaningful reputation damage, surely there'd be a better way to communicate this in the product? I think it's fair to assume that there's less interest in building features that encourage users to spend less money.
Agreed. AWS is downright hostile about giving you any idea about what resources you actually have deployed, to the point where it must be deliberately malicious. Even their billing page is terrible for tracing down the root cause of usage with the default configuration.
You have to go into third party tooling if you want any chance of seeing what’s actually going on, especially if there’s any odds of you deploying stuff in another region and even moreso if you have more than 1 account.
At this point, I’d say it should be a best practice of owning 2 AWS accounts, even as a hobbyist: one payer account with a HEAVILY locked down SCP and then a child account with the stuff you’re deploying.
Or they're charging people in at-best mysterious if not outright duplicitous/malicious ways because it makes them money without having to do anything (save for send a bill and have the right fine print in the right places. )
It's no accident, it's not just "bad UX", it's deliberate.
> AWS doesn’t charge you in mysterious ways. It charges you in specific, predictable ways that nobody taught you to look for. That’s a knowledge gap.
Observe the mental gymnastics to explain away "mysterious ways" by making it the users fault and calling them - *checks notes* - stupid, for not knowing something AWS is very intentionally keen on you not knowing.
I sure hope OP was getting payed for this AWS ad, imagine shilling for a multi-billion dollar company for free.
It's the UX, deliberately omitting information or not. There at least used to be some toggles for example without any indication that they mean anything other than a minor load balancer configuration change, but caused I think $200 month bill addition. No indication at all that they have a meaningful monetary impact.
Reading what they're offering, the stand-out to me is making publishing the applications easy for others on your team to use. That would he a pain point for non technical users.
I get your point. But if sharing with others is a vital part of this, then ... they'd be better off sticking to web apps instead :)
"Create with glaze, hit publish and we'll give you an url".
Even though they portray some of the benefits of this app as unique to desktop apps, they're not (e.g. storing data on device, offline mode etc.).
Am not a hater. Love Raycast. Saw the post and opened the link intrigued what they came up with and was somewhat disappointed tbh. Good luck to them anyway!
Most organizations I've set Sentry up for tunnel the traffic through their own domain, since many blocking extensions block sentry requeats by default. Their own docs recommend it as well. All that to say, it's not trivial to fully block it and you were probably sending telemetry anyway even with the domain blocked.
With the right tricks (CNAME detection, URL matching) a bunch of ad blocking tools still pick up the first-party proxies, but that only works when directly communicating with the Sentry servers.
Quite a pain that companies refuse to take no for an answer :/
