←back to thread

140 points handfuloflight | 1 comments | | HN request time: 0.514s | source
Show context
throwaway12345t ◴[] No.46263358[source]
Lee is a marketer (not in title but in truth) for Cursor. He wrote a post to market their new CMS/WYSIWYG feature.

We spend ~$120/month on our CMS which hosts hundreds of people across different spaces.

Nobody manages it, it just works.

That’s why people build software so you don’t need someone like Lee to burn a weekend to build an extremely brittle proprietary system that may or may not actually work for the 3 people that use it.

Engineers love to build software, marketers working for gen ai companies love to point to a sector and say “just use us instead!”, just shuffling monthly spend bills around.

But after you hand roll your brittle thing that never gets updates but for some reason uses NextJS and it’s exploited by the nth bug and the marketer that built it is on to the next company suddenly the cheap managed service starts looking pretty good.

Anyway, it’s just marketing from both sides, embarrassing how easily people get one-shot by ads like this.

replies(4): >>46263836 #>>46264770 #>>46264932 #>>46269381 #
1. kmelve ◴[] No.46264932[source]
(I wrote the response) Just because it's marketing, doesn't mean it can also be educational?

I am a marketer and a developer. But I also know that you don't get far by trying to trick people into your product. As a marketer, I also get front row seat seeing how software plays out for a lot of businesses out there, and I have done so for a lot of years. I wanted to share those perspectives in response to Lee's write-up.

So yes, obviously both these pieces make a case for how the software we're employed by solves problems. And anyone who has been in developer marketing for a while knows that the best strategy is to educate and try to do so with credibility.