Uncomfortable pattern I keep seeing: the products with the worst UX debt are usually the ones that found product-market fit fastest. They ignored "best practices," shipped ugly-but-functional features, and got users anyway.
Then they scale and everything breaks. That's when they hire me.
Hey folks - I'm curious what is the primary reason you launch on PH. Is it to get initial traction, or is it feedback? I've launched a couple of products on PH and I've definitely seen an SEO benefit, my search rankings went up both the times and I got new backlinks. I've not yet seen high intent users coming through, is it dependent on the launch category positioning?
Three things went wrong on Arteza this year and not one was reported by a user.
A spend function wrote bad balance events, so the ledger drifted and the cap I thought I had wasn't the cap. Nothing threw, nothing alerted. Our sign-in gate promised a credit amount that didn't match what the account actually got, and I only found it by opening every modal in the product one at a time and reading what it promised. And before launch I said the failure I expected from 111 one click apps wasn't a crash, it was an app returning something plausible and slightly wrong that nobody would bother to report.
I'm preparing for my first Product Hunt launch this Monday.
For those who've launched before: looking back, what's one thing you wish you had done differently in the final few days before launch? Could be positioning, launch page, community engagement, distribution, timing, or something completely unexpected.
when asking AI tools to solve specific coding challenges, their default solution often involves suggesting new third-party libraries or npm packages rather than using existing utility functions in the repo.
over time, small utility packages add up, increasing bundle size and creating additional security maintenance tasks for the team.
how do you guide AI coding tools to prefer native project patterns over suggesting external packages?