Ah, forgot about that. I was questioning if I should switch my big subscription to ChatGPT (was on the 20$ Open AI and 100$ Claude), seems like a no brainer now
This article answered a lot of questions I had about the direction Mistral is taking.
Great read, probably really smart positioning from Mistral but I can't help but be disappointed by the lack of ambition and innovation. This looks like more of a regulatory moat than a competitive technology.
Musk burned billions in brand value by renaming Twitter, and he'll be doing the same with Cursor. The Cursor brand was the only wedge he had with enterprise customers, who seem to avoid Grok products altogether
Although I'll probably never use Grok, this is an interesting release. I always thought GPT work and Claude Cowork are a bit awkward in their positioning. I'm still not sure what the real difference is with standard chat. This looks like the same thing with seamless memory and skills creation.
This seems like the middle ground between work mode and OpenClaw/Hermes (which I've never tried, too scared to mess something up). I think the humanization of the agents is cute and makes sense UX wise. I hope to see alternatives soon.
> Todo apps were always cheap to build, but some became large companies
The point is that simple apps like these have just become insanely competitive to distribute, and it's best not to think of it as mini businesses
> Tools help me achieve a specific goal. Products help me work better in a way I've not necessarily thought about myself.
For me a product = a packaged set of tools.
What was interesting with the micro-saas wave is that a lot of people started to build products around one simple tool. It worked because sometimes a well-crafted one is better unbundled. Here's one example that thrived on this premise: https://www.bannerbear.com/
Oh, haha! I actually love shit like this, but ya, not in a blog as I'm also a mouse-fidgetter. You could tone activating it down a bit by only activating it on a quick click and not at all if there is selected text [/END advice-no-one-asked-me-for]
> Most of the effort in software goes into understand people other than you and building guardrails for them.
100%, which is why I think hyper-tailored, small software is an exciting option. When you shift your goal to serve 1000 customers, the hardest part is not having a tech stack that supports them, but making sure the software is good enough for all their different needs. Or you try to meet them all and you get into feature creep.
> For businesses, the buy vs. build tradeoff does now have some new compelling evidence in favour of "buy" but there's still maintenance needed for the service internally
What if you neither buy or build the software but buy the service outcome?
A data analyst that creates custom workflows with auto-generated dashboards. A dev-ops that provides access with exactly the information you need, depending on the hand-off level you want for the process.
My point is that a lot of these micro tools that started to appear the last few years will vanish, either bundled with bigger SAAS, internalized, or shifted to a service offering. This trend started with productized services, this is the next step.
> SaaS is far from dead.
Micro SAAS*. I agree with all your points, but I do believe the small software landscape will change drastically in the coming years
Possibly.. I admit I'm quite bad with distribution, hence why I usually work with a few clients long-term.
But we do see a sharp rise in the release of apps, without the same tendency in use. [1]
I do think there will be a place for SAAS, even micro-SAAS, but the competition will be fierce and I don't have a lot of hope for indiehacker without any "unfair advantages" like unique knowledge, data, network, etc
