I like it, it's better than other apps. Reason is it present you a list of all components of left sidebar so we don't have to think of creating it from scratch. Just drag and drop and your work is done.
Thanks for finding the bug! I've fixed it, but I think I should provide another alternative for adding elements to the editor—like using CMD+K with a dialog or a plus sign icon for mobile UX.
Hi guys,
For the past few months, I'm working on a form builder called minform with focus on UX and themes. Current form builders too restricted when comes to styling. It's free for unlimited submissions with paid plan for team feature.
Hey this is great. But this should be pay per pricing model instead of $30/month upfront. I don't think with this pricing model it can be compete with cloudflare suite of products like durable objects, kv etc.
We offer a generous free tier which doesn't limit your number of projects, never pauses, and available for commercial use. The pro plan is $30/mo and then pay for usage.
Templates are overkill. They don't have good copywriting - lorem ipsum all over.
And this is just start. Soon there will be animated websites section, aggregation of free tools and localstorage based tools.
No backstory as such. The reason I'm building this is for SEO, to aggregate everything (websites, ai tools, localstorage based free tools). My main product is minform.io - form builder which is still in beta phase and lacking many features. It's difficult to rank 1 page vs multiple pages on google.
Have tried similar things in the past with hreftools (see my profile here). Got many upvotes on both hackernews and reddit, but stopped working on it due to other paid freelance projects.
This time I've a multi-year plan for both of my side projects (funded by freelancing).
> It's difficult to rank 1 page vs multiple pages on google
It's my understanding that landing pages haven't been a tool for being ranked for years now. Back in the heyday of search engine affiliate offer spamming, landing pages might have served this purpose. But today, landing pages are more for being a critical part of a "funnel" for marketing. An ad campaign may link to a landing page which has been crafted specifically for that segment. The entire page has a focus to get the prospect to the next step in the funnel via the "call to action." As part of your testing, you would have multiple landing pages per segment which you rotate in your ads. Therefore, the most important metric would be the conversion rate of the landing page (the percentage of visitors follow through to the next step via the call to action.)
Therefore, it's not the design of the landing pages which is important. All that matters is how they convert. An ugly landing page which converts well is infinitely better than a landing page which doesn't convert at all. Someone who is well versed in marketing will know this, and won't be impressed with a portfolio.
The next issue is that if you have a landing page which converts well, the last thing you want to do is put it in a portfolio. A high performing landing page is a secret sauce of an ad campaign. You don't want for competitors to steal your secrets.
Landing pages generally aren't meant to be discovered outside the campaign. You probably don't even want for them to be indexed by Google. This is different from the main portal of the website, because the web portal is more general with less focus on calls to action. You also can't shape the main portal to different segments.
Supabase can't become firebase alternative, if they do not introduce pay per hour pricing model. Their plan starts at $25/month (their free plan is shit). Even their auth is not free unlike firebase which has everything almost free to start.
