I have several personal tools I’ve built and maintained.

It’s always more work than it looks. You can get to mostly usable tools quickly if your request isn’t too difficult, but every time I use them I run into another thing that needs to be fixed, changed, clarified, or cleaned up.

It’s fun at first, but over time you realize you’re spending more time building the tools than using the tools to build the thing you originally wanted to work on.

I think personal software is best for highly specific tools or for things you need to use repeatedly for a very long time.

For something like a SketchUp competitor, I wouldn’t want to try to maintain my own. The number of edge cases and features is bigger than you imagine up front, and the vibecoded version that might appear a few hours after your prompt is going to be very far from the version you want to use.

My experience is it's short to get a working tool and long to finish. Many 3D modulers (blender for example) have literally 1000s of features. Yes, you might not need all of them but you probably need 100s, each with quirks and UI/UX decisions. Just iterating on camera controls can take days. You get an orbit camera working via a prompt. But then find it only zooms in/out so far because the LLM decided that was ideal. So you prompt to fix that. Then you find moving the camera is not zoom aware so it moves in meters per frame and when you're zoomed in things move too faster. So you prompt to fix that. Repeat 10000x. Every feature, extrude, bevel, chamfer, subdivide, select vertices, select faces, select edges, etc etc all require this handholding and finese.

At least that's my experience.

Small tools with few features is great. a 3D modeler is not that.

Typically what takes time isn't learning a shortcut here or there, rather it's to understand how a proficient user thinks and THUS why the tool work in a "weird" way for newcomers. It's easy to click and paint, why would pro user layers? It's so complicated... then you watch how pro do it, and it's because behind the complicated steps comes a lot of power.

I have no doubt as a newcomer you can make software that will do what you want, but most likely the outcome will no be good, not because of yourself or the tool, but rather because the expertise to map the problem space to the solution space is not trivial, and that's precisely what requires a new way to think, and thus tools that aren't so easy to learn. It's not poor UX.

"So many times I’ve had to spend hours learning a software, reading docs, doing tutorials, only to later be able to do a small basic idea of what I actually wanted to do in the first place

Now I can just build only the software I need, for the thing I need it for"

Or another way to put it for devs “A language that doesn't affect the way you think about programming is not worth knowing.” ― Alan J. Perlis

I really appreciate this sentiment, and at the same time there are real opportunity costs to building and maintaining your own tools. Even in the era of tokens.

I think it comes down to where you want to spend your time and attention.

https://www.winestockwebdesign.com/Essays/Lisp_Curse.html

I think that could be true once you're experienced enough to know what you want.

Before that, though, I think you have to learn what the experts do and what can be done and what you should want. And then you can start to make your own opinions.

By then, unless the major players have done it really wrong, you're not going to make something better than what already exists.

Right now, it's different, because we have that experience prior to the ability to just wish up an app and have it happen.

I literally just had Claude build a 3D modeler slice of Blender that I wanted but that also works in VR [video: (https://www.reddit.com/r/aigamedev/s/q5Y6cskYb9)]

I think the value of adapting full tools to your own workflow far outweighs the maintenance costs nowadays. The tool above for instance took my agent a couple hours and it was good to go. It wasn’t a small slice by any means either: it supports edit/obj mode, extrude, loop cuts, modifiers like subdiv, save/load, undo/redo, bones, auto rig, posing, and more.

Mind you, this is a slice of an open source tool which was still outside of what I wanted from it. Cost wasn’t even part of the equation here.

> At the same time I wonder if we are entering an era in which it’s just better to build your own tools

I wonder if Claude Code and other similar tools start to maintain their own base apps that everyone keeps asking for? This would be like a "cache" that makes the requests cheaper/easier to deliver?

Then everyone's "own" apps is really just a customization layer on top of a solid base that already does all the heavy lifting.

So many people are building their own versions of:

- PDF editors

- Word processors

- 3D editors

- Video editors

- Pixel-based image editors

- Vector-based image editors

- CAD editors

etc.

In some of these there are a few flavors as well that are major architectural choices. But most of what people are doing is just playing around with UI and file formats. Much of the functionality is generally the same.

> I wonder if we are entering an era in which it’s just better to build your own tools

Not necessarily. But only if what you need is not available in open source or not achievable by forking open source. Otherwise it’s a waste of money (token) and attention. This is a significantly smaller pool that “build [all] your own tools”.

Although, AI mega corpos would love if we do constantly re-build everything. You can tell by the tendency of the agents to write everything from scratch instead of importing the code that does the same thing or better.

With strong building blocks, perhaps. But I don’t want to maintain millions of lines of AI generated CAD kernel (or pay the token and wait time). I’m also happy not having to make design choices in that space considering I have 0 experience with it. It’s still a liability.

I've been using SolidCraft with MCP and Codex to model things. Pretty wild. I gave it a photo of a pencil sketch and a paragraph; a few minutes later I had a 3D model. https://solidcraft.io/mcp/

Yes, see:

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=50406927

For an example. Lots of people are now vibe coding their tools.

I have always been skeptical of the reality of this, especially for businesses. But then one person on our CSM team spent a week building an alternative to Gainsight, saving the company like $90k a year. Granted, it required a technical person to do it even with vibe coding, but it doesn’t take much of his time to maintain it.

Better as in you'll be happier with the end product after a dozen iterations and two dozen small tweaks? Sure.

I think people underestimate what a time investment building your own tool that's of at least medium complexity is, though. It might be worth it if it's something you'll use regularly for a long time, but I don't foresee it being the norm. Even assuming no bugs ever or no performance issues ever and all the architectural decisions made were appropriate (pretty far from current reality), merely describing what you want and how it should behave and look like is a long process, and one that isn't all that enjoyable once you go through it once or twice already.

The existing software that has been around for several years and you kinda dislike is probably much more reliable than your own homebrew, too. Doesn't matter in some cases, matters hugely in others. Learning that your custom video gallery organizer just vanished half your family videos probably isn't very enjoyable, but at least it's easy to recognize it happening. Something more abstract like CAD or 3d printing slicer, ehhh...

Looking at CRM tools these days and they are so complicated that I’m thinking of just using my tool and add features as I need them.

Would love to hear advice from people who use CRM tools on the job.

you can try fabivo, its not for all uses, but i think the ai agent is great.

Skip the 3D modeler and have the agent do the operations directly instead.

A good visualizer might be useful thought! If that part of the work needs to be validated.

Why are people suddenly entirely unwilling to invest effort into their projects...

Wat is the point of personal projects if in the end you learned nothing

Once upon a time, not so long ago, people gained skills by learning about things instead of outsourcing all the hard parts.

By outsourcing the modeling to Claude or whatever, you don't learn how to build 3d models on your own. You've become dependent on the LLMs, and you're trivially replaceable by someone who can build 3d models on their own...because they can also learn to tell Claude to do all the work.

This just sounds so horribly inefficient though i’m sure the makers of LLMs love you.