There are tons of these types of review sites. http://www.stacklist.com/ https://startupresources.io/ https://stackshare.io/
And they're all pretty much the same. They're mostly just a list of tools, sorted by popularity or recommendations.
I'm sorry, but this is just not that useful for me. It still requires a ton of time to look through and research the tools. Sure, it's useful just to help start your research, but it ends there.
I've researched this space in-depth and have a solution that's different, but way more useful. I'm just too busy working on other stuff to tackle it right now.
---------------
To give you guys an idea of what I'm thinking, here is a tool comparison that is much more useful to me.
https://medium.com/sketch-app-sources/five-app-prototyping-t...
It's ONE guy that researched 5 competing prototyping tools with a specific task in mind. He lists the pros and cons of each, and goes into some detail on each one and how they performed with his particular task.
I wouldn't be copying this exact format, but the takeaway here is that it's ONE person that has researched ALL or most of the tools within a particular category, and had an actual task to accomplish, so they have a much better idea of what each does, its strengths and weaknesses. The problem with founderkit and similar sites is that the reviewers have not researched all the tools within a category, so they're only giving you their viewpoint on one tool.
If anyone is interested in my idea, let me know. I may devote some resources to it if I find the right people.
There's nothing helpful in your comment. At risk of being hypocritical, I'll add a piece of advice; be constructive. Telling everyone you have a genius solution that you're hogging all to yourself (but aren't acting on?) is not helpful. "Here is a way you could make this tool more helpful to people like me."
Ideas aren't valuable. If they were, there would be a marketplace for ideas, and it would be doing billions of dollars in business. It's execution that's valuable. There are 7 billion people on the planet, your idea isn't unique, so share it to be helpful to others or build it yourself, but please don't berate the hard work of others and then tell us you have something better with nothing to show for it.
I'm falling into the trap of HN negativity here, but it's so frustrating to see talented creators who are actively executing get roasted with no discernable actionable constructive criticism.
Listen - I get it, we have guttural reactions to things (especially things we have neat ideas about or know ways to do better.) I tell the people I work with to lead with a compliment, always, before criticizing and I often forget to do so myself (I didn't do so here ;)). Doesn't mean it's OK - and in an environment like HN where you actively have time to think before you hit the "reply" button, it's pretty unacceptable. We're adults. We're all trying to build things and do what we love. We can be supportive.
There's more concentrated disappointment here that's aggregated from other sources besides you, so please don't feel like this is targeted to call your comment out, specifically. Please try to be thoughtful in the future, if you can.
Edit: You updated your post, thank you. Please be kind to content creators - they're working to make things better for more people than just you, and could use your help in figuring out how to make their products appealing to you.
In our experience, actionable feedback comes from founders who have used a product, not those who just spend a lot of time researching. That's precisely the problem with Gartner, Forrester (who basically get paid by both vendors AND buyers to make decisions for companies, with zero interest in the best tool for the job). If you want to throw darts at a product, theirs are world class targets.
While it's easy to throw darts at a handful of short reviews from founders who are so busy they can barely keep up with email, we hear from Founderkit users daily that they find tools and are able to make decisions immediately. Don't read too much into the short reviews. There's a lot more going on here.
I _just_ commented on the stackshare post earlier today https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13375748
When you're picking a tool to use in your software stack, use something that makes sense for you. Say "I need something that will let me do X effectively" instead of "We need to use the latest technology from the hippest news makers."
Barring a handful of nearly-universal tools, it's very unlikely that the types of things that work great for massive public companies like Facebook and Google are going to be the best options for your 1-10 man startup.
When we built this, we were tired of the curated lists too. 1) They don't change as the community's barometer on what they're using changes. 2) It's one person's view, not the founder community.
The goal of founderkit is to be more than just reviews, but this was the logical place to start since nobody seems to have done it in a way where it's alive.
If you don't want to use it, no prob. Lots of people have found it useful. Maybe you will too after it's more than just reviews.
It's just that I really want to see something different being done in this space, and I'm always hopeful when I see a new site tackling this, only to then be disappointed with the same old same old.
Take what I'm saying as constructive criticism. I know it's hard when you've worked so hard at something, and the first thing you see is criticism (trust me, I've been there).
But to your point, you say those other sites don't change as the community's barometer on what they're using changes, and it's one person's view, not the founder community. But this is exactly what BestVendor was doing. Their tagline was "Learn About The Best Tools From The Best Entrepreneurs"
Check out the internet archive: http://web.archive.org/web/20130412003037/http://www.bestven...
https://www.slant.co/topics/341/~2d-game-engines
edit: another problem with a single person owning the comparison is keeping it up to date.
Really appreciate you mentioning Stacklist here. Your comment has given me a lot to think about in how we can provide value to other entrepreneurs and founders.
Would love to connect and learn more about your idea. Email me at danny@stacklist.com.
Also, giving each tool a ranking from 1-10 when the only way to vote is Like/Neutral/Dislike is misleading.
That is the definition of confirmation bias.
> I know there are a million sites out there for this but good luck googling "best free conference call."
(Which more or less further supports my point of this being a popularity contest)
Why would someone who's burning runway like that make a good customer? It sounds like you've honed in on the failed startups and made an entertainment product for them.
How do you get a piece of their VC pie before they close up?
Also: dude, you already have my twitter, why do you still need my email address? Twitter already gives you that. What If I don't have a title? Why is that required?
No thanks
It seems that security is an afterthought at most startups.
We split categories when we get enough companies to support it. Let me know if you have a list and I'll happily get this in there, I'd love to have more security products as well.
Maybe there are just too many options nowadays for a visualization of possible stacks to be useful.
cc @joshu
That said... without knowing the size of the user base, how much cash these companies have, etc. whose to say even 1/2 of them will be around 5 years. These tools need to be used and integrated with great caution.
Most things I have clicked on have about 10 ratings tops and one line reviews. Even as a quantitative tool it's not that useful (yet). Would be interested in seeing some stats. From a first glance I expect a correlation between number of ratings and positive ratings. At least the subcategories I clicked through all followed that pattern.
I'd also love a filter on the subpages like: https://founderkit.com/biz/optimizely where I can filter the negative feedback to the top (especially once there's a lot more data). I personally make most decisions after reading negative feedback and only roughly browsing the positive feedback.
Edit: I'd also like to read a bit more on the reasoning of the ranking. Why was this system (popularity, score, recency) picked over purely ranking on score?
