I’m testing a simpler path from HTML to a shareable page
I’m building SaveKit because I wanted a small, focused alternative to setting up a full website just to share one page or static project.
The current free beta lets a user sign in, paste HTML or upload a ZIP, preview it, and publish a shareable URL. It also supports multilingual content, expiry controls, and basic analytics.
Payment is intentionally disabled while I learn where new users get stuck. I’m looking for feedback on the sign-up → first publish flow and the kinds of pages people actually want to create.
What would make a tool like this useful for your next side project?
Thanks for the detailed push. I’ve now changed the first-run path: visitors can pick one of four finished starter pages (invite, weekend plan, personal profile, or waitlist), publish a free 24-hour demo without an account, then claim it after signing up. I also rewrote the hosting explanation so it says “1 point keeps 1 page online for 1 day.” I’m measuring template use → first shareable URL → signup → publish, rather than treating views as validation. If you’re still open to the 30-minute task swap, I’d be happy to test your quiz page and watch you try this flow: https://savekit.net/new?template=dinner-invite
Wrong paste just now, sorry. That was my earlier comment again. Here's the actual reply:
Deal. Here's mine: mvpbuilder.io/go?utm_campaign=swap&utm_content=swap02
The task: you're a developer with a day job and a side project that stalled weeks ago. Find out what you'd be committing to if you booked the call, and what happens right after it. Stop before you book or send anything.
Tell me the first point where you had to guess, and the page where you found each answer. Not whether it reads well. If you close the tab, tell me which screen it was. That's the most valuable thing you can send me.
I won't explain anything while you're in there, and I won't argue with what you find.
And I'll take yours as you wrote it: start from your dinner-invite link and get to a live page I could share. I'll write down exactly where I stopped or had to guess.
Deal — I’ll treat this as a task, starting from the dinner-invite link and noting the first point where I have to guess or stop. Your framing is useful because it tests whether SaveKit can be understood without founder guidance.
You asked where new users get stuck, so here's one from ten minutes ago.
Your post says payment is intentionally disabled, and the landing says "Free beta, no payment required". Then the nav has Pricing, and Pricing has three plans with real numbers on them, plus a points currency I had to stop and work out. Three lines sat next to each other: "5 points per day", "50-point wallet", "1 point = one page online for one day". I couldn't tell if that means five new pages a day, fifty pages total, or one page kept up for fifty days.
So I never reached the sign-up to first-publish flow you actually asked about. I stalled one step earlier, on what this would cost me, and the answer was there twice in two different shapes.
To your actual question. The thing I'd want to know is what it costs to leave a page up and then forget about it, because that is the real behaviour with a side project. Nobody comes back to manage a wallet.
And a trade, if you want it. I spend 30 minutes on SaveKit properly, sign-up through first publish, the part you asked about, and you spend 30 on my entry page. Not opinions, a task. I'd hand you something like "find out what this costs and how long it takes", then shut up and watch where you stall. You'd do the same to me. Mine is a five-question quiz page for a product I sell. It's the part I already suspect is broken. 92% of people who land there never click a single question, and the numbers can't tell me whether they left or just sat there.
No hard feelings if it's not your thing, and no follow-up from me.
You’re right—the pricing language made the beta test harder to understand. The intended meaning is 1 point keeps 1 page online for 1 day, while the beta path does not require payment. I’m treating pricing as a later decision and simplifying the first-run explanation around anonymous demo → claim.
As a web developer, I really like the idea of keeping this focused instead of turning it into another full website builder. The HTML/ZIP upload and instant publishing flow sounds especially useful for quick projects
Thanks — that’s the focus: publish a small page quickly without turning SaveKit into another full website builder. I’m testing AI-generated HTML and simple shareable pages first.
You asked where new users get stuck, so here's one from ten minutes ago.
Your post says payment is intentionally disabled, and the landing says "Free beta, no payment required". Then the nav has Pricing, and Pricing has three plans with real numbers on them, plus a points currency I had to stop and work out. Three lines sat next to each other: "5 points per day", "50-point wallet", "1 point = one page online for one day". I couldn't tell if that means five new pages a day, fifty pages total, or one page kept up for fifty days.
So I never reached the sign-up to first-publish flow you actually asked about. I stalled one step earlier, on what this would cost me, and the answer was there twice in two different shapes.
To your actual question. The thing I'd want to know is what it costs to leave a page up and then forget about it, because that is the real behaviour with a side project. Nobody comes back to manage a wallet.
And a trade, if you want it. I spend 30 minutes on SaveKit properly, sign-up through first publish, the part you asked about, and you spend 30 on my entry page. Not opinions, a task. I'd hand you something like "find out what this costs and how long it takes", then shut up and watch where you stall. You'd do the same to me. Mine is a five-question quiz page for a product I sell. It's the part I already suspect is broken. 92% of people who land there never click a single question, and the numbers can't tell me whether they left or just sat there.
No hard feelings if it's not your thing, and no follow-up from me.
Love the signup → HTML/ZIP preview → live URL path — that mid-step is usually where people bounce. One useful metric set: time-to-first-shareable-URL, and preview→publish drop-off. If you offer 3–4 one-click starter templates (portfolio, changelog, waitlist, docs), you might shrink that gap without turning SaveKit into a full site builder.
Agreed. I’m tracking first shareable URL and preview → publish drop-off. The starter templates now cover invites, weekend plans, profiles, and waitlists, with the goal of shortening the blank state without broadening the product.
the first publish flow is probably where i’d spend the next week too. i’d make the first success possible with a tiny preset or example someone can publish in one click, then let them replace it with their own html. a blank canvas is a lot of work before they know the value. i’d also watch whether people ask for expiry controls before publishing or only after they’ve shared something.
That matches what I’m testing: offer a one-click preset before asking for HTML, then let people replace it with their own page. I’m watching whether they share first and only care about expiry after that.
The sign-up → first publish path is the right place to focus. I’d track time-to-first-shareable-URL and where people drop between preview and publish; an example gallery of 3–4 page types (portfolio, changelog, one-page waitlist, docs) could make the blank-state decision easier without adding much UI. Which page type are early testers trying first?
Thanks — that’s exactly the next question. I’m testing invites, weekend plans, profiles, and waitlists first; there isn’t a clear winner yet. The funnel I’m watching is template → first URL → external share → signup.
Congrats on shipping SaveKit — the focused “paste HTML → shareable URL” flow feels useful for founders who want to validate an idea quickly without setting up an entire site.
I’m testing a small tool that reviews public landing pages for clarity/conversion blockers, using evidence from the page. I’d love to include savekit.net in a free beta review; in return, I’d only ask for 10 minutes of honest feedback on whether the diagnosis is useful. Interested?
Yes, interested. A focused clarity/conversion review of savekit.net would be useful. Please include the site in the beta review and I’ll give 10 minutes of concrete feedback on whether the diagnosis is actionable.
This comment was deleted 7 days ago