Show HN: I built a website builder on top of Notion
potion.so
potion.so
This [1] demo scores 81 and this[2] has a 68.
[0] - https://developers.google.com/speed/pagespeed/insights/?url=...
[1] - https://developers.google.com/speed/pagespeed/insights/?url=...
[2] - https://developers.google.com/speed/pagespeed/insights/?url=...
It looks like most of the guidance on Pagespeed for large images, and layout shift due to images. The guidance to fix is to set fixed images sizes for these elements, and to re-encode images into more efficient image formats, at their displayed size instead of their maximum source size. Potion probably doesn't currently know the correct width for an image because they give their users kind of unlimited style control to choose the image's size and layout, so they request the image at maximum size to make sure it's as sharp as possible. The images are still coming straight from Notion.so, and aren't served, transformed, or cached by Potion.
The rest of the page is fast - it's static HTML pre-generated or incrementally generated using Next.js, with a bit of JS on top, which is faster than Notion's fully dynamic thick client Javascript app. The example sites look good!
On the subject of Pagespeed's image guidance, Notion gets one out of two correct - when viewing these images from a Notion doc, we request & serve images at their displayed size using a query parameter, but we don't currently transcode the image to a more efficient format based on the browser's image support.
news.ycombinator.com has a 100 score, but if you compare the actual "Lab Data" it's not a massive difference.
First Contentful Paint: news.ycombinator.com: 1.3s, potion.so: 2.7s
The biggest difference is Time to Interactive: news.ycombinator.com: 1.4s, potion.so: 11.2s
That 11.2s is pretty bad, but PageSpeed Insights doesn't take into consideration which interactions work before all the JavaScript has loaded. In the case of potion.so, the HTML is rendered on the server (or perhaps statically generated), and the vast majority of important interactions on the homepage are simple HTML links that work even with JavaScript disabled. The 2 big exceptions (and probably the biggest contributors to that terrible Time to Interactive metric) are the third-party embedded video and chat widget.
To be fair I'm using Cloudflare and the static assets were all probably cached at the edge but the initial HTML page itself is always fetched from the server (I'd have to pay for their APO product to do that which I tested out and it works well but introduces the usual cache issues)
I just spent some significant effort fighting against Next.js and its bundles just to go from a 68 -> 90 for my own project
The difference was day and night on a real phone on 3g
@noahbragg - Given that you're built 100% on top of Notion (or at least I think you are), how are you thinking about platform risk long term? They could cut you off their APIs, end life for some undocumented API you rely on, or just build your features into their own product at any point.
Could you please clarify whether we can use something like AWS CloudFront or Cloudflare in front of this without issues?
Edit: Really need hierarchical nav menu's though. That's an immediate killer. I'll switch right now if you say that you can support submenus in the next month or so.
Edit 2: Another suggestion, can we have per-page injection? And split the content injection capabilities so we can inject in either the header or the footer? This would be useful, for example, if we want to inject less important scripts or styles at the bottom of the page so that we don't drop lighthouse ranking. This is a low priority feature request.
I mean this in just the warmest way to the author of the comment, it's just as a SaaS founder, what an emotional roller coaster it took me on.
This product is awesome. And notion is better than Confluence as a CMS.
What do submenus mean for this?
I’m using super.so right now and thinking of switching to this. It appears I’d have to do my own nav menu either way. Not completely sure how that would work. None of the showcase sites have much depth of pages if at all. Only the official site itself seems to have menus. Super provides breadcrumb horizontal “menu”. Not great either.
There are navigation menus in potion.so at the moment (they’re great!), but they only support 1 level.
For any site bigger than a placeholder site there’s virtually never going to be only a single level menu.
Full disclosure: I am the founder of MDX.one
I might try switching.
The reason I built this to replace a Wordpress site is because the rest of our ecosystem is a bunch of Svelte apps, and with this we could just drop content from Notion straight into our site.
We can even use fancy pants things like synced blocks for site-wide announcements, etc. etc.
One caveat with using Notion though is that without a good caching strategy (which we don't have), the site's going to be pretty slow, because Notion's API just fetches block by block. You have to have a "cache mode" for production - something that fetches and caches every X amount of time, and have users hit the cache rather than straight from Notion, since it sometimes can take 10+ seconds, which will time out your worker.
Maybe Show HN mosts need more guardrails to prevent shameless promotion. Producthunt is better suited for this.
It's not "hackers are going to hack it for free", it's more "your grandma is making a website on Wix for free" and, it won't make you feel like a tech wiz or a startup cool kid, but it works.
That's also why I think Potion (and other startups targeting Notion and the incoming Notion marketplce) is pure business genius. I'm sure the target market will appreciate Potion. I had to try Notion for work and it's definitely not for me (slow and clunky) - but somehow they have a lot of evangelist in SF startups and I'm sure they won't care about paying 1 pumpkin spice latte per month just to say they made a website with Notion.
Not to mention using Notion as a CMS means you're limited in what you can do, zero extensibility, etc.
Actually around $60, and I have more services on it, not just the site.
All you get is a barebones OS without a GUI. You have to set up everything yourself: server (e.g. Apache), language (e.g. PHP), database and SSL. This is a non-starter for people that have never seen a command line interface before.
WordPress is endlessly extensible and customizable, so I don’t think Notion would be more flexible. Maybe Notion is simpler or easier to use, but at the end of the day, you’d still be very limited in what type of site you could build.
WordPress is also getting close to releasing a WYSIWYG editor for the full site, which is also extensible and customizable. But this is already available for content, which is mostly what potion would be handling anyways.
Looking over the list of potion benefits:
1. Nothing to install
2. It's simple - focus more on your content
3. Update and it's instantly live!
4. Use Notion (You already know it)
5. No page limits
5. Potion generates pretty URLs and preview images auto-magically from your page titles
Only 2 and 4 seem to be things which something like WordPress might not have, and they are very subjective anyways. For number 1, there are lots of hosted WordPress platforms which don’t have you installing anything. For 5, there are probably lots of plugins you supplement the default social image behavior if it doesn’t work for you.
I think this is a very cool project, and it’s always nice to see more experiments in the CMS area. But I don’t think flexible is the right word to use to describe it :)
Disclaimer: I’ve been a WordPress contributor, so I’m definitely biased. :p
Mine is a hippie ish free organic growing virtual coworking community. So it is easier to get active members to add to Notion than Wordpress. I think this is an edge case though.
Potion has pricing though. And I'm not gonna pay, because I don't know what the setup is - am I paying for Potion to run a Notion account with my stuff in, and then they layer on top?
Or are they reselling part of their own account?
Or do I need to pay for a Notion account also?
Actually it's a bit funny because Potion is 2.5x more expensive than the Personal plan on Notion, even though the utility of Potion is provably smaller.
To the people here wondering how does this compare to Squarespace and Wix: it does not. This is for Notion users who want to publish a website while using Notion.
Ping me on Twitter @finereli, let's connect!
Google needs to hurry up with their Workspaces and build something closer to Notion or Coda
And it behaves more like a wiki than Google docs
Think about how content of any kind ends up published:
1. Ideate - what do you want to make? Brainstorm, keep notes of ideas. Make plans.
2. Draft - put your ideas down in their native media. Write, paint, etc.
3. Revise, collaborate - polish things up, retouch photos, etc. Loop in your editor.
4. Distribute - publish your creation, so others can get it. Transform it into a form that's sharable. Focus on reach.
A product like like Squarespace is really only concerned with step (4) of the creative process - publishing to the web. So you'll need to do the rest of the steps with other tools; maybe just pencil and paper or maybe Google Docs, and then bring that content into Squarespace for distribution.
But, Notion does (at least a passible job at) all steps in this workflow, especially for text content. People use it for notes, then share privately to collaborate with comments. Publishing is a single switch to make a page public. We're not as fully-featured as a Wix; for example Notion doesn't offer analytics or advertising placement. But since we're pretty good at all the other stuff, it makes sense for people who like Notion to find a way to augment the publishing use-case with something like Potion.