Ask HN: Do you have a bias for IndieMaker products? | Hacker News Reader

Ask HN: Do you have a bias for IndieMaker products?

19 pointsmooraage12 comments

I've been in the IndieHacker circles for the past year or so. I have to say, I love the support the community gives to small makers (who are often solving small but substantial problems).

My question is, do you consciously choose an indie maker over a larger software company? If you do, is this because you can often reach the founder of the SaaS you are using to solve problems you might experience in a product or is there another reason?

I've started to see this behaviour in myself (maybe because I am trying to be one). I'd love to hear from you all.

View on HN

The smaller the company providing software, the more likely they are to be unstable and therefore a risk to your own operations.

That doesn't mean they are rejected, but it means they must be world-class in their solutions and service to mitigate that risk. If they are, they will grow and become stable. You buy from small companies when they prove they have the capacity to be long-term viable solutions to your problem, not because they are 'indie'.

I'm okay with small products, like screenshot taking app.

The more responsibility I give to the product, the more solid background it should have.

For example, if I had a company with 100 devs, and I need a to-do app for them, I won't choose small indie hacker product.

However for myself, I use them: screenshot taking apps, gif making apps, etc.

That's completely understandable. I have noticed a considerable rise in micro-SaaS analytical products like ilo.so for Twitter. What are your thoughts on these?

Disclaimer: not my product, no affiliation.

Indie Maker all the way. If you have an issues with a big corp product, just try to get help. With an independent maker you might get the founder or the lead developer on the phone to help you (or add a new feature just for you).

I also have a bias since I'm an indie maker and know the passion we put into our products.

For products which give a static output (e.g. canva) I would actually prefer an Indiemaker product.

You are right about the community too, it's one of the best people around who go to amazing lengths to help each other. This is one of the reasons why I would certainly prefer it.

I will often subscribe to indie maker products that I see as promising to support them, even if the value I personally will get from them is limited.

It has to be products that I believe have product market fit. Often, I will deliberately make an effort to use them and give feedback (as my time allows).

There is obviously a risk with indie stuff that it will not be continued, but one could say that about Google products and/or traditional startups (e.g. Parse).

Not specifically. If I'm looking for a tool to solve x for me I generally look for the best option - which is a combination of quality and price.

Often the price will naturally drive me to a smaller company, but I consider that as a bonus rather than one of the real "criteria" that went into the decision.

Depends, if it's critical I am a bit more leery because I want to know they are going to be around for a long time. That said, I love to support the little guy if I can.

Consciously? No. I first look at the merit of the product/service/team and if they are the best solution to my problem.

Does the product add value and work as intended? Cool. Most products designed by committee don’t.

i just joined

Reply on news.ycombinator.com