I just launched Azure 30 — a free 30-day hands-on Azure challenge (AZ-900 ready)
Hey IH,
After a few failed attempts at studying for AZ-900, I got frustrated
and built the thing I wished existed.
The problem with existing options:
- Microsoft Learn: comprehensive but dry, zero accountability
- YouTube: unstructured, you watch but don't do
- Bootcamps: $1,500+ for a 30-day plan
So I built Azure 30.
What it is:
→ 30 daily lessons, one Azure service per day
→ Each lesson has theory + a real hands-on task in Azure Portal/CLI
→ Streak system with Streak Shields (miss a day? shield protects you)
→ AZ-900 exam tip in every lesson
→ Day 30: 20-question mock exam + downloadable certificate
→ Days 1–5 completely free, no credit card
Built with React + Vite + TypeScript + Supabase + Lemon Squeezy.
Solo project, took about 3 weeks.
Would love feedback — especially on the curriculum order and
whether the hands-on tasks feel realistic.
Congrats on the launch! I think products built from personal frustration often have the strongest product-market fit because the founder deeply understands the problem.
I completely agree that most AZ-900 resources are either too passive or too expensive. A structured 30-day challenge with hands-on accountability sounds like a much better way to help people stay consistent and actually retain what they learn.
Curious to know: after launching Azure 30, what has been the biggest challenge so far, getting users, keeping them engaged for all 30 days, or converting them into paying customers for future products?
The "I got frustrated and built what I wished existed" origin works well here because AZ-900 prep genuinely has this gap. Microsoft Learn is thorough but passive, YouTube is unstructured, bootcamps are overpriced for a fundamentals cert. Your positioning sits cleanly between them.
A few things worth thinking about:
The streak mechanic is smart for retention but raises a question: is the goal "learn Azure" or "keep a streak"? Gamification works when the game reinforces the learning. Streak Shields (miss a day, shield protects you) might actually reduce the accountability you're trying to create. Worth watching whether people who use shields retain the material vs people who genuinely showed up daily.
Days 1-5 free, then paid, is a clean model. The conversion question: does someone on Day 5 feel confident they'll pass AZ-900 if they finish, or just that they've learned 5 services? The paywall needs to land at the moment where "I need the rest of this" is strongest. If Day 5 doesn't end on a cliffhanger or a progress metric ("you now know 17% of the exam surface"), the drop-off will be high.
Distribution question that decides whether this scales: who's your actual buyer? Self-studying individual (price-sensitive, hard to reach) vs company training budget (less price-sensitive, needs different packaging like team dashboards, completion reports). Most cert-prep tools that survive long-term sell B2B eventually. Worth designing for that path even if you start B2C.
The downloadable certificate on Day 30 is a nice touch but be careful positioning it alongside the actual AZ-900. You don't want confusion between "completed this course" and "passed Microsoft's exam."
What's the pass rate looking like for people who finish all 30 days?
Reading the post, I found myself less curious about the curriculum order and more curious about which of those alternatives people are actually switching from.
Someone replacing YouTube may be solving a very different problem than someone replacing a bootcamp.
Those can end up looking like the same product while pulling it in very different directions over time.
Smart positioning. You're not competing with Microsoft Learn on depth, you're competing on accountability. That's a much easier story to market. If you can publish completion-rate data after the first few cohorts, it could become a strong growth asset for future promotion.