I got burned by a model deprecation in Japan and built Zombify to stop it from happening again
I was on holiday in Japan. Left home knowing my app was finally
working the way it should — last thing on my mind was model
deprecation. Found out something broke from a user. Not ideal.
What annoyed me more than the outage was two things: there was
no warning from the provider, and I'd never thought to put it
on my "could crash" list. Both felt like fixable problems.
So I built Zombify — it watches AI model lifecycle changes
across OpenAI, Anthropic and Google Gemini and emails you when
something's on a shutdown path before it takes your app with it.
One-time $45 AUD. No subscription. I hate monthly fees as much
as I hate finding out things are broken from users, so that
felt like the right call.
Still early — registry is manually curated and not exhaustive
yet. But it's live, it works, and I'd genuinely love feedback
from people who've hit this problem.
The product pain is real.
But Zombify feels too playful for the kind of failure you’re solving.
This is not a fun zombie-alert tool.
It’s infrastructure risk monitoring for AI apps before model changes break production.
That category needs a name that feels sharper, more durable, and more technical.
Davoq.com or Exirra.com would fit this direction much better.
Davoq feels strongest if you want it to sound like serious AI infrastructure.
Exirra works if you want broader model/runtime monitoring positioning.
Thanks for the feedback - the name mirrors what happens when a model is deprecated, and the target market is Solo creatives, indie devs and small teams, so the branding is for us. Give it a try, I'd love to know your thoughts on the actual functionality.
Fair point — if the target is indie devs and solo creatives, the playful angle makes more sense.
My only concern is that even for indie users, the moment the tool is warning them about model deprecation or production breakage, the trust bar changes.
Playful gets attention.
Reliable gets relied on.
So the question is whether “Zombify” helps the first click but slightly weakens confidence when the user is deciding whether to depend on it.
Happy to take a look at the functionality too — the core pain is real.
I see what you're saying, but I'm still wondering if you actually visited the website, looked at the pages, looked at the tool, tried it out, looked at the changelog, and tested how it all works.
From a branding perspective, the trust bar is embedded in the changelog, and the tool itself. There's also a free tier that allows you to look at the status of your model, a depreciation page called the graveyard and a page dedicated to the explanation of who, what, why or when. All of the features are designed to enhance trust signals and boost visibility for agentic branding.
Also, thanks for inspiring a new component and an improvement that will demonstrate the functionality.
Have you considered agentic branding in your products?