A guy on Reddit called my website embarrassing. Now he works with me
Someone roasted the AppX website on r/SaaS. I asked what else annoyed him, then offered him a job. Plus the four real bugs I fixed this week, and why the free plan is becoming a $5 plan.
AppX team ·
At the end of September someone posted on r/SaaS with the title "AppX's website is f***ing embarrassing".
He wrote that he uses AppX every day, and that the website looked like it was made in 20 minutes from an AI template. One line I still remember: "A random kid with Figma could probably do better."
He also assumed AppX has a team and a budget. It doesn't. It's me, a solo founder from Uzbekistan, no funding, $0 MRR at the moment I'm writing this.
This article is the story of what happened next, and an honest list of what I changed this week because of feedback like his.
First, what AppX is
AppX is an AI app builder for people who have an app idea but never opened a terminal.
How it works, step by step:
- You describe your app in normal words.
- If something is unclear, it asks you one or two short questions (for example which part to build first).
- It shows you a plan: the screens, the tabs, and roughly how many credits the build will cost.
- You approve, and it designs the look and writes a real React Native (Expo) app.
- You open the app on your own phone with Expo Go, or in the browser preview.
- You change things by chatting ("make the button green", "add a settings screen").
- You can download the full source code on every plan, and even if you stop paying. You are not locked in.
Someone in the same thread asked a fair question: why use this instead of Claude Code or Codex? My answer: if you are comfortable with those tools you probably don't need AppX, and that's fine. AppX is for the people who aren't.
He was right about the website
I built the builder first and the landing page last, and it showed.
When you build alone you always pick what feels most important, and for me that was the product. But visitors see the website first. If it looks lazy, they assume the product is lazy too.
I had already started replacing the page the day before his post. The new one is built around proof instead of promises. Every example app shows the exact prompt it was built from, how long the build took, and how many credits it cost, and you can open each one right in the browser.
From roast to job offer
I replied under his post with the truth (no team, no money, $0 MRR) and asked him two things. What exactly still looks bad, fonts, layout or copy? And since he uses AppX every day, what annoys him inside the product?
We moved to DMs. He wasn't just hating, he had specific points, things I stopped seeing because I look at the same screens every day. At some point I said: okay, then come do it. He said yes.
He wrote later that he expected me to be annoyed, and that seeing the site already changed made his decision easier. Feedback only matters if people can see you acting on it. He'll share his design work as it comes together.
What I fixed this week
None of these are exciting. Each one is a real person who got stuck and maybe never came back.
1. Questions disappeared after a page reload
What users saw: a user told me "I never saw any questions." His app showed "Planning your app" for hours and nothing happened.
What was wrong: when AppX asks you a question, the question lives only in the live connection, not in the saved chat history. If you reloaded the page, two things loaded at the same time: the question (re-sent by the server) and the chat history. If the history arrived second, it replaced the whole chat and erased the question. The app waited for you, you waited for the app.
Fix: the page now keeps an open question when the history loads, and the status text says "Answer the question below".
How I checked: I slowed the history down on purpose and reloaded. Before the fix, the question vanished 3 out of 3 times. After, it stayed 3 out of 3.
2. Retry was broken for 38 projects
What users saw: their first build failed, they pressed Retry, and every retry said "Unable to reserve credits."
What was wrong: it had nothing to do with credits. Before a first build, AppX checks that the project is still an "empty" starter project, by comparing its files to the app template. A few days earlier I added a large internal file (about 1.35 MB, used for type checking) into the template folder. Every project created before that change was missing this file, so it no longer looked empty, and the retry was refused with the wrong error message.
Fix: internal files are kept out of the template comparison. When a project really is not empty, the error now says that honestly, instead of blaming credits.
How I checked: my own stuck project from September 21 built and went live in about 4 minutes after the fix. 38 projects on production were stuck the same way and can now retry.
3. The price estimate was wrong
What users saw: on my test server, the plan said "About 10 credits" and the build charged 29.
What was wrong: the estimate counted one file too few (the colors file is always generated), and it didn't include the design step, which is charged in the same build.
Fix: the estimate now counts both. I tested it against past builds and it is usually off by about 2 credits. In a fresh test it said about 34 and the build charged 36.
One thing was always true and still is: you are never charged more than your balance.
4. Upgrading was hard to find, and the discount was hidden
What users saw: there was no clear way to upgrade from the dashboard. And when you opened the plans from settings, it said "You're out of credits" even if you had 100.
Fix: there's now an Upgrade button on the credits card in the sidebar. The plans window says "Choose a plan" unless you really are out of credits.
The launch discount is now visible too. Code SUPPORT50 gives 50% off your first payment on Starter, Premium or Pro, and it applies automatically at checkout. That means Starter is $10 for the first month, then $20 a month. On a yearly plan it's half off the first year. Before this week you only discovered it at checkout.
How I test before shipping
I don't trust "it works on my machine" anymore. Before a release I run a set of 12 different test apps on a staging server, each with 3 follow-up edits. The last run before shipping these fixes: 12 out of 12 apps built, and 34 out of 35 edits worked. The one failed edit led to another fix in how AppX checks generated code.
After shipping, I check on the real site with a real project, not just "server is up".
What's next: no more free plan, $5 instead
In the same reddit thread another person told me to remove the free plan. Give people a small taste, he said, and add a cheaper plan so the jump from free to paid is smaller.
So that's what I'm testing next. The free tier is being replaced by a new Basic plan: $5 a month for 100 credits a month. It will apply to everyone, including people who signed up for free before. If you don't subscribe, you keep access to your projects and you can still download your code. Building and editing will need a plan.
Why: free credits brought people who try one build and leave, and every build costs me real money in AI usage. I want to see if a small price brings fewer but more serious users. It's a one-week test. I will share what happened, good or bad.
What I learned
Don't argue with the person who uses your product every day, even when the title has a swear word in it. Ask what's wrong, then fix it fast enough that they can see it. Sometimes they turn into your best help.
If you have your own "this is embarrassing" about AppX, tell me. I read everything.