raphael-gold

we are also planning to expand support to other browser engines as we grow :)

these are definitely real life example we experience every day. It is hard to draw the line between simplicity and customisability. For this our biggest inspiration is Figma. It's amazing to see non-designers drawing things in Figma without getting too many frustration together with designers doing complex and very precise designs & design systems without feeling limited.

Their interface feels easy to start with but can take you very far if you need customization and scalability.

We are far from what they achieve, but that's where we'd love the end up. :D

yes, that's a pattern that we saw as well! Teams migrating to webflow or wordpress to give back the autonomy to marketers. We also saw teams willing to migrate to the Jamstack from squarespace sites or webflow sites but not doing it because it would mean that marketers would lose their autonomy on the front-end. We felt these pattern should be broken and that Jamstack should be "marketer friendly" as well :)

we handle CSS at component level, this means that you can add custom css for every element or "section" (UI block) in the site but not at site level. If you import your custom component it can have its own CSS. We don't support adding CSS at site level yet, but so far users didn't ask for it too often.

we actually "privately launched" 18 months ago and we knew some people in these companies who had the problem we are trying to solve - so they were willing to try us out. They gave us tons of feedback, we improved the product thanks to that and we now felt like it was a good time to launch publicly and get more feedback from you folks :)

that's a good point, we are currently discussing this with our early adopters to find the right balance. We might increase this per-visit limits. What would be a fair limit for the business plan according to you?

that's interesting, we actually have a real difficulty here because our buyers are either marketers or developers. As the problem we are trying to solve is shared between them, both are looking out for solution and we are having a hard time positioning our marketing website's communication because of this. Also, thanks for sharing your impression on the video! When you say "if their site is not set up in just the right way to fit weweb", do you mean that it feels like the editor won't allow you to build custom layouts that fit with any design? Your feedback is most welcomed!

Oh wow this flow would be really cool! Both observations are linked in a way: the WordPress ecosystem is really impressive and we'd love to create something similar in the Jamstack universe. To do that we are planning to open a "marketplace" where users could find components, themes & plugins. So, if we enable one-click integrations of components in a user's library, I think you are right that it'd be better not to have to link a Github account as most non-developers won't have one.

We will start working on the marketplace sometimes in Spring. We'll probably have our power users contributing first and then gradually open the marketplace to all the developers willing to build for the community.

whoops! yes sorry the editor only works with chromium based browsers. We will add a message to let users know!

The collaborative feature is built from scratch :D It works with WebSockets. At the beginning we used WebSockets to enable autosaving and undo (ctrl+z) in the no-code editor: we save all the actions happening on the elements with unique IDs. Once this was done, it was much easier to add the collaborative feature.

yes for the free tier we host the website. Starting from the paying tiers we enable self-hosting. Today it is still an on-demand feature but we are planning to enable self-hosting in self-service before the summer. We also plan to have one-click integrations with Netlify and Vercel (we are in discussion with them at the moment).

Yes, the tool is in the space of no-code site builders, we typically see users choosing weweb when they've outgrown their regular site builders like Webflow, Wix or Squarespace and want more customization options.

yes, we've seen that one of the drivers for choosing our tool is often a shorter time to market and faster iteration cycles.

yes, from a no-code edition perspective, it is the problem we are trying to solve. We've seen a lot of users frustrated by their regular site builders because they couldn't do this extra 10% of customization. Another frustration we've seen is that websites built with regular no-code builder live in isolation from the content ecosystem of the company (headless cms, custom back-end / database, etc.). While testing feel free to let us know if you need an integration with one of the cms mentioned above. We don't have Contentful, WP nor Netlify yet but they are on the list :)

We've typically seen technical people using weweb.io when they want to collaborate on the website with non-technical people (their content creators or marketing team). Interestingly, we see teams splitting the work on the website as follows: developers build custom components and upload them from Github on the editor, then marketing people build the pages and edit the content in autonomy, so developers are involved only for highly custom front-end elements. You are right about the Airtable integration, it is the most used feature of our tool so far :D together with the custom vue.js components integration.