zlacker

>>jnord+(OP)
I'm CTO at a vertical SaaS company, paired with a product-focused CEO with deep domain expertise. The thesis doesn't match my experience.

For one thing, the threat model assumes customers can build their own tools. Our end users can't. Their current "system" is Excel. The big enterprises that employ them have thousands of devs, but two of them explicitly cloned our product and tried to poach their own users onto it. One gave up. The other's users tell us it's crap. We've lost zero paying subscribers to free internal alternatives.

I believe that agents are a multiplier on existing velocity, not an equalizer. We use agents heavily and ship faster than ever. We get a lot of feedback from users as to what the internal tech teams are shipping and based on this there's little evidence of any increase in velocity from them.

The bottleneck is still knowing what to build, not building. A lot of the value in our product is in decisions users don't even know we made for them. Domain expertise + tight feedback loop with users can't be replicated by an internal developer in an afternoon.

>>benzib+xN
> For one thing, the threat model assumes customers can build their own tools.

That's not the threat model. The threat model is that they won't have to - at some point which may not be right now. End users want to get their work done, not learn UIs and new products. If they can get their analysis/reports based on excels which are already on SharePoint (or wherever), they'd want just that. You can already see this happening.

>>jeswin+3Y
Yes. This is also why trying to add an AI agent chat into one's product is a fool's errand - the whole point of having general-purpose conversational AI is to turn the product into just another feature.

It's an ugly truth product owners never wanted to hear, and are now being forced to: nobody wants software products or services. No one really wants another Widgetify of DoodlyD.oo.io or another basic software tool packaged into bespoke UI and trying to make itself a command center of work in their entire domain. All those products and services are just standing between the user and the thing the user actually wants. The promise of AI agents for end-users is that of having a personal secretary, that deals with all the product UI/UX bullshit so the user doesn't have to, ultimately turning these products into tool calls.

>>TeMPOr+v81
>> This is also why trying to add an AI agent chat into one's product is a fool's errand - the whole point of having general-purpose conversational AI is to turn the product into just another feature

We built an AI-powered chat interface as an alternative to a fully featured search UI for a product database and it has been one of the most popular features of 2025.

>>enrage+yQ1
Right -- and that's likely because search was completely broken, people always complained about it, and nothing was ever done to improve it.