3 ms·

Thanks for sharing. That's one of the reasons entering this market is challenging. 1. So many existing solutions are bad, so people will assume you're also ba

Thanks for sharing. That's one of the reasons entering this market is challenging. 1. So many existing solutions are bad, so people will assume you're also bad. 2. You will be lost in all voices and blogs and ads for these bad products. But for the point about making it too easy hurts PMF, I think it's not going to have that much of an impact and it's never a bad thing to have your product perform well. I'm more worried about companies opting to build their own flow because it matches their brand and design. Any thoughts about this?

gizmo 4y ago
Brand and design is used as an argument when the product isn't doing anything critical. If your solution solves a real pain point nobody cares what it looks like. The onboarding for my SaaS products could be a lot better, but somehow we never get around to fixing it. But also, we're not tempted to look for solutions out there, because we want onboarding that is very specific for our software, and we don't want a generic solution or a another dependency that could break or keeps changing on us.
- amukbils 4y ago
  That's very interesting. Thank you for sharing this feedback. This could be the thinking of many companies as well. Regarding the product solving a real pain, I agree. Aesthetics are overlooked if the need is there. On the other hand, wouldn't you want to optimize this part of your funnel? Maybe even see if there's a problem between signups and conversions? You'd want your users to get value from your product as soon as possible, and a good onboarding truly helps (see courier.com, for example). I'm pretty surprised that your aversion to another dependency outweighs the possible benefits of having a good onboarding flow.