Next.js development for Austin SaaS and product companies

Austin's software companies sell to people who find them, read about them and sign up without talking to anybody. That funnel crosses a technical boundary in the middle, and most of the engineering difficulty lives exactly at the crossing.

Before the boundary, pages have to rank, load fast, be measured and change often. After it, an application has to be authenticated, uncacheable, invisible to search engines and released carefully. Those are close to opposite requirements, and a great many Austin codebases have one application trying to satisfy both.

Two applications, one domain

The requirements conflict in a way that configuration cannot resolve.

The marketing site wants pages generated at build time, indexed, carrying campaign parameters, editable by people who do not have a deploy key. The product wants every request authenticated, nothing cached, nothing indexed, and changes going through review. Setting both in one application means choosing the stricter option everywhere, which makes the marketing site slower and harder to edit than it needs to be.

Running two applications behind one domain - a path-based split, a shared design system, a shared session - gives each one its own defaults. The visitor sees one product; the repositories have different rules, different release cadences and different owners. That is a decision about shape taken at the start, and it is tedious rather than difficult to make later.

The crossing is where the funnel leaks

Signup is the moment the visitor moves from one set of rules to the other, and it is the step most commonly broken in a way nobody notices.

The form belongs on the marketing side, because it is part of what has to convert and be measured. The account creation belongs to the product. In between there is a redirect, and anything held in client state does not survive it - a chosen plan, a referral code, an answer to a qualifying question, a UTM parameter the attribution depends on.

The rule is the same one as in any flow that leaves and returns: state that has to survive a redirect lives in the URL or on the server, never in a React hook. The redirect state problem is written about payments and applies identically here, because a signup and a checkout have the same shape.

Austin growth teams should not need a deployment

The last recurring problem is organisational and shows up as an engineering complaint.

A pricing page, a comparison table, a landing page for next month's campaign - these change weekly, and the people who change them are not engineers. If that content lives in the repository, every word costs a pull request and a release, and the growth team's velocity becomes a function of the engineering queue.

Putting the content somewhere editable while keeping the layout in code removes engineering from the path without giving up the performance of a generated page. A headless CMS integration is the usual shape, and the test of whether it was done properly is whether a campaign page can ship on a Friday without a deployment.

Commercially

Scope fixed in writing before work starts, priced per project. The country-level ground - state privacy laws, sales tax on software, accessibility exposure - is on the United States market page.

Invoiced by Codefacture Yazılım A.Ş. in Türkiye, in US dollars by bank transfer, with no Turkish VAT under the export-of-services exemption and no US entity on our side.