Why wouldn't you sign up?

i don't use github. i use gitlab.

I wouldn't try it because I don't understand how it helps me. I'm worried that running this would create a huge pile of issues that would be hard to resolve because it sounds like they might not even really be part of my codebase. I'm worried it would create too much noise: a backlog of a whole pile of things that ought to be fixed but that no one has time for because there are more urgent things to handle.

(None of this might be valid but it's my honest reaction.)

Two items of specific feedback:

• The screenshot that shows a graph of bugs going sharply up and to the right gives a worrying impression.
• On the same screenshot, the list of duplicated issues for "Fix Sentry config" reinforces the concerns I expressed above.

With all that said, this looks like a cool product and the landing page design is really nice, good job!

Hi Makenna, here is my feedback.

1. It is not clear who the target audience is. Who should use this?
2. What the product does is also kind of vague, what testing does it exactly do. How does it deploy the codebase or manage auth? Does it work with all tech stacks?
3. The screenshots just show some endpoints being hit, which does not seem like automated testing at all and adds to the lack of credibility.

I think adding a video showing how it works will make a lot of sense. The description is vague and the comparison with traditional testing makes me feel like too much is being promised. There is certainly room for improvement there. Maybe you can also describe who the product is for.

All the best and I hope this helps.

I like the idea, I'm guilty of having production code that's been deployed for years without (any) tests. Having this background, here is my thought process when I visited the landing page:

• This is nice, I like the idea. I like the design, looks professional.
• Hmm. How could any software figure out what meaningful tests to write? How can I make sure that these tests are worth anything?
• I keep reading hoping to find an answer for that, I see some points re: % coverage. That's interesting, but I care more about the quality of those tests. I hired contractors to write tests for my software before and I know that one could write useless tests very easily and quickly.
• I see no evidence that proves these tests mean anything, so I leave the page.

Some tips that could help:

• Explain why these tests are meaningful in the landing page. Discredit the thought that these are useless tests.
• Social proof: Work with a bunch of startups to test the service and include testimonials from them about the quality of generated tests.

I hope this helps!

Hi Makenna,
You asked for brutal so you're getting brutal ;-)
My gut feeling was that I don't like it, and I needed a few seconds to understand why.
Then I remembered the old discussion that code coverage doesn't mean anything. I can write 100% code coverage that would barely catch basic bugs.
My feeling from reading your LP is that you'll create automated tests that are not worth anything, i.e. I'll get boilerplate tests that are worthless for my product and just bloat my testing suite.
I would love to see more proof on your LP that says that these are quality tests and not just quantity.
Hope this helps,
Jonathan

Yes, Alpha means it's not working yet.

"PRIVATE ALPHA" puts me off.

If it works just launch it.