1
 2
 3
 4
 5
 6
 7
 8
 9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43

+++
title = "Single-person Apps"
summary = "Thoughts on the lack of single-person applications"
date = 2024-08-11
category = "Misc"
draft = true
+++

### Why are so many apps built for >1 users?

I think I know the answer to this, more or less. Most apps are fairly easy to extend from 1 user to 2 users,
and if you go >1 you may as well go to some undetermined limit of users.

In most cases this is probably great! Extending how many users an application can handle means you can share it with friends,
colleagues, or whoever may want access.

As of late, however, I've been lamenting on how few apps are created for 1 user only.

### What are the benefits of a single-user application?

1. Namespacing (or lack thereof)

Most applications that have user accounts also then require namespacing, such as 
```
blog.example.com/user1
blog.example.com/user2
blogexample.com/user3
```

Now, say `user1` wants to simply host their blog on this hypothetical application for themself
```
blog.user1.com/user1
```

There's stuttering in the domain. A minor issue, and maybe even a nonissue for most people, but it bothers me enough to want an alternative.

2. Security

Okay, this one is somewhat subjective. But I would argue that ACLs for a single user can be significantly simpler than >1 users.

Any application that needs to deal with public/private (and maybe unlisted) 
_and_ a matrix of those permissions between N users is going to be more complex than a single user.