I guess the english wasn't too clear, I do think it's quite concise though and I will think of another way to convey the same message while keeping it concise.
Thanks for explaining this, I will look into it and change the copy using your advice.
The other product is a full SaaS boilerplate filled with components and docs, and rightly so, they have more to offer which is why they are more expensive.
However, I argue that more is not always better for a boilerplate product, because more boilerplate = more confusion and unnecessary abstractions which can confine the user to using specific technologies.
My product aims to do the bare minimum to configure all of the important parts of your full stack Next.js app without any extra boilerplate.
I perhaps shouldn't of exposed the card type and 4 numbers, that was me not being careful, however I don't believe it's a major risk since you can't really do mich with this, especially since the identity of the customer is hidden.
As for exposing the payment intent, there are no problems with this unless someone manages to get my stripe API keys and can then query by payment intent id.
I know right? I sometimes get jealous of laravel PHP folks, but then again JavaScript is the only language I have advanced proficiency with, so what can I do.
create-t3-app is great, and our product is not too dissimilar.
However, we are not a starter boilerplate (although we offer this as well), rather we give the developers power to choose what integrations they need in the form of composable plugins, e.g. `next-inject add stripe` will integrate stripe in one click!
Exactly, shipfast is completely overpriced, and it confines you to use a certain tech stack, which may be a problem later down the line when you realise a certain service might be needed but it's not included.
Our service is 5x cheaper, and you have 100% modularity.
I mean, the source code is publicly available on github too, so I believe it's possible for people to look through the code and deduce whether I am hacking them or not.