I find myself building bespoke tooling for my own and workflows these days, not only because of the obvious reason of software being so much cheaper to build, but also because there are SO MANY options for solving any given problem that it feels impossible to evaluate all of them.
If it's not a crucial piece of tech for a work problem then it often feels like paving my own way is both cheaper mentally (kind of amazing that's true these days) and probably a better fit.
..then of course I have to contend with - "Is this going to be a maintenance nightmare in the future?" and then I still usually conclude "no, the maintenance will be aided by the same approach that the construction was".
It's interesting how dramatically and quickly the scales have changed in this equation - and for such a wide range of software.
For example, I am looking for a coding agent coordinator with a particular (but not all that insane) set of requirements. I used both Claude and Perplexity to show me options and break them down by fit against my requirements.
I got completely different lists! No overlap!
And no perfect fits.
@stagas🤸profilefollowcreative technologistGitHubstagas - Overviewstagas has 462 repositories available. Follow their code on GitHub.
creator of textlogreplied to@zenprofilefollowfather, cyclist, #haskellnotesfollow, #emacsnotesfollow:
It will become increasingly harder to find niche markets for software when those people can just build it themselves exactly how they want it. In the end, people want to accomplish tasks, and the AI is going to be building the software on-the-fly exactly for that task, why do we need generic software that may or may not be a fit?