My primary concern with establishing a company in Germany isn't the bureaucracy—it's the unreasonable exit tax. This tax feels like a trap because it's levied on the company's valuation, not its revenue, effectively anchoring businesses to Germany. I'm curious about the preferred destinations for entrepreneurs looking to avoid this issue. Do most opt for the Netherlands or Ireland, or is there another popular choice?
This is exactly why I wouldn't want to switch from my Kinesis 360 Pro even though I prefer the low profile switches and maybe the thumb cluster from the Glove80.
I just love the build quality of the Kinesis 360 Pro.
In terms of speed, at least when we look at mostly single-threaded work load (like most dev work is), a M2 Macbook Air is faster than every Desktop PC. Correct me if I'm wrong.
Eh. The 12900k still has the edge in most single threaded benchmarks, and the latest Threadripper Pro will easily crush it on multithreaded loads (all while drawing close to an order of magnitude more power). Also your MacBook Air will thermal throttle if under load for too long, while a desktop computer offers a lot more options for cooling. Further more a desktop computer gives you the option to use faster storage and more and faster RAM which might be very relevant in some scenarios. Plus there is the whole GPU/CUDA side of things which may or may not be relevant to you.
All that being said, I'm typing this on an M1 MBP and the perceived day to day performance is better than any desktop computer I've owned, even if it will no doubt lose out a 'real' workstation when it comes to running 24 hour CFD simulations.
I suspect that if I crank my I/O subsystem to do flushes no more often than once in 40 seconds and lie to fsync/fdatasync, my Threadripper setup is also going to run circles around my M2 Air. (Heck, I suspect my XPS13 will be almost on par.)
But then again, the M2 Air has this bulky UPS called „laptop battery”, so they can afford such little lies as long as the OS itself won’t shit itself and die randomly. Granted, it happens rarely, but nevertheless.
For instance, when you send a message from the backend container to the database container during ordinary CRUD, the backend container will largely be waiting for the database to start processing. Something similar for most frontend requests - usually in dev work, you press a button, it sends an API request and awaits the response; the API request sends a message to the database and blocks on the response. The database sits around idly waiting till it receives a message, and sends something back. Then the backend postprocesses the reply and produces the response, and then the frontend postprocesses the response. There is some degree of joint action during the actual communication phases but it wouldn't put a huge load on the multithreading capacity of your CPU.
Something similar can be said for Gitlab/Slack/Email - in the background, they could easily be using the spare CPU time rather than competing for time, and you wouldn't actually notice it. But they also should spend most of their time waiting around doing nothing.
So I think the claim is specifically true for some stacks with poor test coverage.
But if you have compiled code, it should probably be compilable in parallel (and if it isn't, you should be complaining to the compiler writer and/or refactoring your code). Likewise, unit tests should in practice be runnable in parallel - if they are not, they're probably closer to integration tests. Even integration tests should be writable so that they can run in parallel, because you hope to have more than one user acting in parallel. And you generally shouldn't be testing your feature development manually. Even if you prefer to visualise your process, you can code it up in something like cypress so that you can run them later or check up why you missed this special case when the bug reports come in.
So I disagree with the original assertion, but I don't think you've provided an effective counterargument.
Sorry about that! At which point did it stop working?
Most bug feedback I've gotten since going live has been at the verification page for your phone number. If this is the case, the solution has been to go back a page and submit your number again - happy to support here over email if you'd like!
Our strategy revolves around the intimacy of the sharing that the app has created so far. Despite being simple (and buggy it seems!), you really only need 2-3 family/close friends to make the app joyful - successful or not we've aimed set up the app so that you get that experience as soon as possible.
An (non mom-test) example here is in how it improved my close relationships. My aunt passed away from cancer a few months ago, but before that we were able to share moments on Circles that otherwise would have not made it into chat and/or the typical social apps. Beyond holding the experience dearly, the possibilities of intimate sharing outside of typical social media made her invite her friends.
We can of course bake a bunch of viral marketing features into the product (and have started doing so) but getting this single thing right is by far top of the list.
> conversions that google didn't see due to ad blockers.
This is funny. It seems that having an ad blocker is a strong indicator for people that are very interested in technical stuff (and are at least technically literate enough to install it). This sounds like a prime spot for placing certain ads. Since ad-blocking is detectable, we coders are actually opting-in to this kind of labeling. I don't know what to make of that.
The thing with google ads is that I can target very high-intent queries. if somebody enters "e-paper wall calendar", I can show them my ad and have very good conversion rates.
This isn't really possible on any other platforms, since nobody goes to twitter with the "I want to buy an e-paper calendar" intent.
And yes, I tuned my ads heavily to these search queries, but in the end the automated google shopping campaign worked better.
As a solo developer (https://simplepush.io) that hates marketing as well, I often find myself trying to make use of paid ads. Probably because it is easier to spend some money than writing a good article. However it hasn't really worked for me so far. Wondering if other solo developers had some success with paid ads?
I've done some search ads for https://www.nslookup.io in the early days, but I don't think it has done much. I don't track users, so I don't know if it got me any returning users. In any case, facebook's recent downtime [1] and a well-received blog post [2] brought in much more traffic.
Some suggestions for your site. Explain what a push notification is. I'm a developer and I only have a vague idea of what you're talking about. Why would I want to do a push? What benefit does it have? Am I possibly already doing notifications a different way that's less efficient/less effective/slower than your method?
Right there are a bunch of blog articles you could write and share that provide free marketing for your product.
Also nothing should be priced at $4.99/year, I don't care what it is, if it's worth $4.99 a year then it's probably worth at least 20x that.
I'm going to pile onto this parent because I too am trying to figure out what this does. I originally think of this as allowing me to push notifications to my app's users devices (eg One Signal, Airship, etc.). As I scroll and read I find that it's likely for uniquely sending notifications to MY device.
Perhaps a vertical, but I'd go after the DIY/hobbyist/maker developer market. Arduino and such. You can write tutorials about how to get X to notify you when Y and they have very active forums. I dove deep into this during COVID lockdown and it actually felt like 90s/early-00s web as the community is great and they still mostly use wikis/forum software to help each other. There's a lot of folks hosting their own tutorial websites. Just make content teaching people of different ways to use your product and I feel like it would be discovered.
I'm not knowledgeable about your market or how your product works, just interested in technology and discussions here, so take this at face value.
To me your product looks like a service. I'm skeptical of any service that is a one-time payment versus some type of subscription. With a subscription I'm inclined to believe there's maintenance. With a one-time payment, I'm inclined to believe that either the product isn't sustainable without growth, will become ad-supported, or will fold.
Yes, I refuse to compete on price. One of my favorite phrases (just read it in a email an hour ago, in fact) is "your price is right on the edge of my budget."
How do I know that the main competitor isn't slowly going out of business at that price? Maybe their product is total crap, maybe I can offer stellar support that's worth a higher price, maybe I can guarantee GDPR compliance, maybe I can offer uptime guarantees, maybe my product is designed to a small niche that will pay a much higher price for a product targeted exactly at them, maybe I can focus on large customers who would be suspicious that a $4.99 price is way too low, maybe, maybe, maybe. In the end, ask yourself if you really think that $4.99/year * n_Customers computes to a number that makes it worthwhile for you.
Because I just want to finish that one feature before sharing it ;)
Jokes aside, I just don't like the idea of spamming communities. I probably should do it more often though.
At least there is no reason not to. You get the very best gaming performance + the best multithreaded performance on a consumer platform. Only the price speaks against that choice. 5900X and 5800X are more reasonable alternatives from that perspective (still very strong).
You'll see little meaningful difference in games (the 5950x has better single core speed than the 5900x but the 5900x is already fast enough to not be the bottleneck in almost all situations). It might be more future proof though, there might be game engines in future which can properly saturate all 16 cores/32 threads. (Ashes of the Singularity is one that can now, but it's uncommon).
If you're compiling really large projects and want to cut those times down it could be worth it though.
I'm in a similar situation and i'm going with a 5900x FWIW. The 5950 feels a little overkill, I don't expect to be fully taking advantage of the extra cores.
So far my thinking is that I'll go with the 5950x since it's more or less on par with the 5900x for gaming performance but has slightly faster single core performance. Also more cores are nice for running tests.
