Show HN: I spent 4 years building a UI design tool with only the features I use
vecti.com219 points by vecti 6 hours ago
219 points by vecti 6 hours ago
Hello everyone!
I'm a solo developer who's been doing UI/UX work since 2007. Over the years, I watched design tools evolve from lightweight products into bloated feature-heavy platforms. I kept finding myself using a small amount of the features while the rest just mostly got in the way.
So a few years ago I set out to build a design tool just like I wanted. So I built Vecti with what I actually need: pixel-perfect grid snapping, a performant canvas renderer, shared asset libraries, and export/presentation features. No collaborative whiteboarding. No plugin ecosystem. No enterprise features. Just the design loop.
Four years later, I can proudly show it off. Built and hosted in the EU with European privacy regulations. Free tier available (no credit card, one editor forever).
On privacy: I use some basic analytics (page views, referrers) but zero tracking inside the app itself. No session recordings, no behavior analytics, no third-party scripts beyond the essentials.
If you're a solo designer or small team who wants a tool that stays out of your way, I'd genuinely appreciate your feedback: https://vecti.com
Happy to answer questions about the tech stack, architecture decisions, why certain features didn't make the cut, or what's next.
> I kept finding myself using a small amount of the features while the rest just mostly got in the way. So a few years ago I set out to build a design tool just like I wanted. So I built Vecti with what I actually need... Joel Spolsky said (I'm paraphrasing) that everybody only uses 20% of a given program's features, but the problem is that everyone is using a different 20%, so you can't ship an "unbloated" version and expect it to still work for most people. So it looks like you've built something really cool, but I have to ask what makes you think that the features that are personally important to you are the same features that other potential users need? Since this clearly seems to be something you're trying to create a business out of rather than just a personal hobby project. I'm curious how you went about customer research and market validation for the specific subset of features that you chose to develop? I think a successful product strategy can be "build something you love, see if others love it too". If that's enough customers, you can judiciously expand out from there. The "fail honestly" method. I think the Apple II is one example of this. This is the best way to build products imo. I'm like this, and I've been accused of being very "vibes-based." However, that's a way more tractable way of shipping stuff instead of "well Jim said he wants X, but Amy said she wants Y" so you end up just kind of half-assing features because you think they might get you users, instead of just being passionately all-in into a very defined product vision (which is a very Jobsian way of doing things). It's also easier to run a feedback loop. If you implement Y, but Amy doesn't give you $5 a month, what are you going to do? Knock on her door? Users have no idea what they want half the time, anyway. If you build a product and no one cares, it bruises the ego a bit more, sure, but if you self reflect, you can eek out your own bad assumptions, or bad implementation, or maybe a way to pivot that keeps your product ethos. In order for this to work, you have to possess good taste. Not everyone has it, and it often does not translate across domains. Good taste is an incredibly powerful differentiator in competitive markets like software. Seems like there’s 3-5 decent choices for darn near anything I need, and usually 1 smaller team has the product that stands head and shoulders above the rest. >”you can judiciously expand out from there” Which is where the bulk of the other 80% of features come from. It’s a cycle. You start as you describe, you expand, you end up with this enterprise monstrosity, everyone using a different 20%. New tool comes along, you start as you describe… Assuming it's enterprise software.. then maybe? Hopefully you can afford to say "No" a lot. If ten people make focused tools covering different 20% subsets of the giant ones, there's a good chance of having a choice that matches what any given customer wants. And for most customers, that's going to be a better match than a big tool that does tons of other stuff they didn't want. How do the consumers find which of the dozen tools support the 20% they need? By, get this, trying out the products. Revolutionary. How about less snark? Especially when, who the heck has time for trying out a dozen products? That's at least a full day of work, which probably costs more than the software itself. No, you just read a few reviews to find the best full price option and best budget option and figure out if the budget does what you need or not. And often go for full price just because you don't even know what features you'll need in 6 months which you don't need now, so safer to just learn the option that is the most future-proof. “…good chance at having a match” might be a reach, as more use cases create a viable market. Are your customers selecting one of five features in your product, or choosing any twenty from among a hundred? Every now and then I stumble on video game developers who have been chugging along for many years, even decades with a handful of dedicated fans. They make obscure niche games that play so well into that niche that they can sustain themselves. Honestly this is something I'd aspire to get to eventually, building a niche product that I love and that just enough people love that I could live sustainably on it, not trying to please anyone but a little collective of people who all agree on what the product should be. > Joel Spolsky said (I'm paraphrasing) that everybody only uses 20% of a given program's features, but the problem is that everyone is using a different 20%, so you can't ship an "unbloated" version and expect it to still work for most people. To me this is an argument for more apps that do less extremely well instead of a handful of apps that do everything poorly. There's nothing wrong with a tool that's honed for very specific user. They'll never hyperscale, but that's also fine. Or then again maybe they can. Google Docs is plenty popular despite being closer to WordPad or TextEdit in terms of functionality than it is to MS Word. Then you'll need interoperability of development artifacts to work with teams. A quick web search suggests that you are probably paraphrasing a newsletter [1] that Joel Spolsky published in 2001. He was talking about software like Excel (of which he was the Product Manager) and Word. Maybe a tool that is more focused on a narrower task (like UI design) can be less "bloated"? [1] https://www.joelonsoftware.com/2001/03/23/strategy-letter-iv... Agree. This quote is being used out of context here. Niche software can and does succeed especially when it’s only supporting a single dev. This isn’t trying to dethrone an adobe product, or doesn’t need to. "everyone is using a different 20%" In my experience, what people use is very malleable to how easy/good the flows are they are presented with. Given 100 equal options, they might use 20, and nobody picks the same 20, but given 25 options, 20 of which present a very good experience, almost 90% will go with those 20 without complaints. Maybe the problem with software is feeling the need to satisfy 100% of users instead of being OK with "only" 20%. Not everything needs to be a min/max problem. The point is that 20% of features doesn't satisfy even 20% of users. It's going to be only a tiny fraction of that because something like 99% of potential users are going to need at least one feature outside the 20%. And if a competitor has all the features they need, but you don't, then you lose the sale. As long as the 20% is enough to sustain your company, sure. You might have to charge more, however. Luxury brands do this, for instance (fewer consumers is actually a strategic choice to make the product more exclusive). “Pro” products also do this (though often “pro” means more features, not fewer). I for one, would certainly prefer a wider ecosystem of _more refined_, less bloated tools. The current system of a near-monoculture of garbage sucks. Could it be more people want Instagram instead of Photoshop? Take a picture, choose from one of 10 filters. Have a ~12 adjustable settings. Vs Photoshop's 1000s of options. Like lots of people prefer Trader Joes (limited selection) to a bigger super market Makes me wish more apps had feature toggles VIM does this perfectly. Not a single feature is exposed to the user. Every feature the user might ever want is supported, they need just Google for which keyboard incantation to invoke it. The testing that would be required to support toggles would be for 2^n. I’m not sure that’s a good solution. Makes me wish more apps followed the UNIX model of separating every feature into separate applications with well documented interfaces that only change when new features absolutely require it and otherwise are only updated for security patches. Yeah I like that idea too. Theres a lot of people who would have trouble with that approach though. One common case I notice this is with FFMPEG. Everything that saves a video needs its own dialog with different settings. It would make a lot more sense if you had 1 single polished FFMPEG frontend that everyone just streamed data to. On the other hand, I'm afraid that if this did happen that FFMPEG frontend would look like a GNOME app and I would hate using it. This is something I like about lots of web apis. Want to generate a video, it's just a few lines of code. Want to connect the user's camera (with permission), it's just a few lines of code. Websockets? About 4 lines of code. There could be 1000s of options for each of those but they mostly distilled it down to what most people need, and they're cross platform. Me, on the other hand, love ffmpeg, because I notice my ytdlp using it and my vlc player sometimes using it and I have two homemade powrshell scripts using it to convert flac to mp3 and whatever. I don't want to open a program and figure out it's UI for those things. It has a job, it does it well, you can sort of pipe things to it and I'm very happy. I'm not sure you understood what I mean. I'm talking about applications like Krita using FFMPEG to export their data as video. Sometimes they include their own FFMPEG instead of using FFMPEG installed in the system. Each of them has its own dialog. The only way to input custom settings for FFMPEG would be to export in a lossless video format and then reencode using FFMPEG, when you should be able to just "connect" a data stream to an FFMPEG frontend as the input and the frontend has all the options you might want to customize how that data is turned into a .mp4 file or .mov file. > The testing that would be required to support toggles would be for 2^n I don't think that's really true, unless the behavior of each toggle is tightly coupled to the behavior each other toggle. Case in point - most mature apps nowadays do have hundreds of toggles for various settings and features. I feel like HTML and CSS could remove 90% of the functionality and only affect 1% of developers, then we could get some actually good web browsers. The issue here is backwards compatibility with web pages that will never be updated. Nobody wants a browser that works with “most of the web.” For this was invented Quirks Mode. Oh god. I world have been happy if I'd never heard that term again... flashbacks. :P Since this is a commercial product, I'm naturally inclined to compare it to other competing commercial products. Why would I want to use this over figma? The sidepanels and floating toolbar are ripped directly from figma (to the point I would fear a lawsuit). Figma is already a very clean UI, which tries it's best not to shove too many features in your face. Whiteboard, presentations, dev mode are all hidden behind menus. "no plugin support" seems like a very odd thing to flaunt as a feature. Many of the most popular use-cases of figma, such as interactive prototypes, svg creation, html/css exports are all impossible in this tool. Then, there is the problem of this being maintained by a single person. Components are essential to any serious figma user, good svg and image handling is important (svg is buggy in my testing), selection colors is vital, color palette is important. When can users expect to see these features if the maintainer is busy hunting down bugs? This is a technically impressive product, but I struggle to see the market plan. I personally hate distractions in software, I go to great lengths to debloat and disable features to make my computer interactions smoother, yet figma is possibly the last program I would want to clean up. Thanks for your input. I'm happy that Figma works for you, and I'm not trying to put Figma out of business :)
I’m sincerely humbled to be compared to such an iconic product as Figma. I started this project as a personal endeavour to scratch my own itch during the pandemic, out of a personal desire to contribute to the field of UX design that I’ve always been passionate about, but at the same time I don’t intend on working as a solo developer for much longer. Some of the features you’ve listed, are currently being worked on, which are going to be launched very soon. I applaud your effort, and I love to see others practice the love of building. Though my original comment didn't suggest this, I would love to see your project succeed and gather a user base. Competition is always good, and this is a very solid start for a project. > endeavour to scratch my own itch during the pandemic Was this an "itch to build something", or an itch as in an annoyance you had with an existing tool? I'm skeptic of whether bloated UI is an itch many users have with figma or similar, which is why I'm critical of presenting this as the selling point for Vecti. If you manage to find an itch many people do have, and you provide the salve, you'll attract paying users. Gotta say I love your humility in the face of challenges from prospective users. Wishing you the best of success, really like seeing your vision and hope it bears out. > The sidepanels and floating toolbar are ripped directly from figma (to the point I would fear a lawsuit) No, a company can’t sue you (well they can try, but it has no legal standing) because you rip off their side panel design. Thank god the industry doesn’t work like this. Figma sued AI startup Motiff in 2024 for copyright infringement and won[0]. Motiff had to reimburse figma, and redesign their product. [0] https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/69166901/figma-inc-v-mo... Not relevant. Figma v. Motif was over allegations of stealing source code, apparently including known Figma bugs. The design of the UI wouldn't be covered by copyright anyway; Figma would have had to file and be granted a patent, which has a much higher bar (IMO not high enough, but that's a different discussion). This. As a heavy Figma user, I don't see why people want to pay $12/month for this product when Figma is as competitive in pricing and much more widely used I think you’re missing the point a bit. Not every tool needs to be Figma, and honestly, that’s a good thing. I’ve been using Figma for a while, and true, it’s powerful. At the same time it becomes increasingly complex, difficult, bloated overall. Simple tasks now require navigating through multiple menus, and the learning curve for new users is steep (took me a while to understand it, and the same experience had it acquaintances of mine). Sometimes I just want to sketch out an idea or make a task without dealing with all that overhead. The no plugin support thing actually makes sense to me. I’ve had Figma slow down or crash because of poorly maintained plugins. Having a tool that just works, consistently, without worrying about plugin compatibility or security issues? That’s valuable.
And yeah, it’s a solo developer versus a massive company (that’s my understanding) but that is why it’s beautiful. Also it’s an uneven comparison if you ask me (but didn’t :)) ). However, the fact that this is even being compared to Figma shows the quality of what’s been built. Not everyone needs enterprise features. Some of us just want a clean, fast canvas without the friction. Every new feature of Figma feels like an attempt to monopolize the entire market. I think he did an incredible job. Good work. This has value. Comparing the tool shared here to PenPot[1] might be more fair. [1]: http://penpot.app/ > Simple tasks now require navigating through multiple menus I'm curious which simple tasks you're referring to? > I’ve had Figma slow down or crash because of poorly maintained plugins Why not uninstall those plugins? Is no plugin support really the best solution to this problem? Was there not a reason that you originally installed those plugins? People ship stuff that doesn't make sense at first blush all the time. But how are they ever supposed to even get into the space if they don't try something? Try to get some customers, see what people want. On day one, he's not saying he's going to compete with Figma. He's just getting it out there. Your comment—You could say you're just asking questions or giving constructive criticism, but it just assumes the negative on so many levels. I can criticize your viewpoint. Why do you think someone should have a product that's ready to compete with Figma on day one? Do you seriously expect him to have an answer for that? I initially wanted to write a comment applauding the effort (making a performant web-based wireframe editor is a technically challenging task). But after testing the site, I got the impression that this is a commercial product trying to get a foothold (as opposed to a hobby project for the sake of learning). At the time of posting, there were no other comments with criticism, so I thought it better to contribute some of my thoughts. My main concern for this project is not that it doesn't have feature parity with figma, but that I don't see a well-thought out business model. Vecti sells a seat-based subscription model (same as figma), has almost directly ripped much of figma's design (a proclaimed ex-figma employee pointed out that this may be cause for a lawsuit in another comment), and the only distinguishing selling point is that it has less features than figma (the tool it's trying to emulate). My opinion (which may be wrong) is that figma is already very good at stripping away features, hiding them behind modes, toggles or contextual menus. I'm a figma power user, but I have held a course in figma and managed to get 20 non-technical people to grok the tool and be able to create their own interactive designs in half an hour. There is space for this. The things you list as negatives are positives. Feature parity or similarity to a big competitor? A plus. Single developer? For a certain kind of consumer, a plus. Congrats on launching. I spent a decade trying to build a design tool. I think I built almost 40 prototypes, to various degrees of completion. Never got to a point where I felt it was good enough to share. It's an incredibly difficult thing to do, so kudos to you for sticking with it. Thank you, and I know exactly what you mean. I myself have rewritten the entire engine ar least three times until I was happy with the performance and the overall outcome. It’s been a long learning experience. As a developer at heart, this project scratched every itch I had from a software engineering perspective :) You should write about this, the gotchas and what you learned how to make things performant. Might drive some traffic. Are any of your prototypes published or available to view? there are various little things scattered around the github org - a js framework, a treesitter grammar, some old docs, a vscode extension, a vim-style editor, an AI-powered code editor geared towards design, etc. Are you still working on this? Because I like the words I see on your GitHub -- vim-style bindings, keyboard driven, sounds like you write a definition language for your designs, basically? Lik Matry is to Figma as openscad is to traditional CAD (Fusion 360, etc)? Though that does sound like a huge project to take on! I don’t know enough about CAD products to evaluate that comparison, but the core idea was to expose language as a design tool. First through code, then through keyboard commands (hence the vim idea). It’s still pretty fun, but LLMs have changed the conversation around what a designer even is, and I’m currently re-evaluating. Matry might pop up in another form. I’m considering turning it into an actual browser for designers. Right now designers are getting into the code and using Claude/Cursor to make changes directly. But they still have to know how to get the app running locally, which is a hurdle. So if they could just navigate to the site, make some design changes directly in the browser, Matry could then take the changes and create a PR on GitHub for them. Designer wouldn’t have to fuss with any dev tools. Kind of a cool idea. Isn’t this exactly the problem that Joel Spolsky wrote about a quarter of a century ago? https://www.joelonsoftware.com/2001/03/23/strategy-letter-iv... A lot of software developers are seduced by the old “80/20” rule. It seems to make a lot of sense: 80% of the people use 20% of the features. So you convince yourself that you only need to implement 20% of the features, and you can still sell 80% as many copies. Unfortunately, it’s never the same 20%. Everybody uses a different set of features. Trello was a successful product despite having way less than 20% of jira's features And there are hundreds if not thousands of Show HNs and YC funded companies that have disappeared in a whimper trying to be the “smaller lightweight version of $x” > and you can still sell 80% as many copies. This is the key to that quote. If you resolve to selling less, you can still have a multimillion dollar product. If you resolve to it being a billion dollar product, then yeah you need every thing for everyone. The quote is taken out of context, he’s arguing just the opposite. Everyone has a different 20% and that 20% is an overlapping Venn diagram. It’s almost impossible to find the “right” 20%. It’s just like the RAD tools - or Java or any of the other cross platform frameworks - there is always something that you need to use that the vendor doesn’t support. There is no “right”. You build what you want based on what product vision or user pattern you’re aware of and you sell that. You can still build a healthy sized business on it if you tap into the right niche and have gotten close enough. This space specifically is tough. Figma and adobe products are similarly cheap. And you still for B2B SaaS have to worry about: 1. Where does this fit in Gartner’s Magic Square? No one ever got fired for buying Salesforce/ServiceNow/Workday/well known company 2. “What if I don’t need feature $y now. But I might need it in the future?” 3. “Everyone in my industry already knows how to use $x, so it will be easier to onboard new employees. Even if they don’t know it, there are courses available” In today’s world for any SaaS to be taken seriously, it has to have Slack/Teams integration and SSO logins with the company’s IDP - there is an industry standard so if you support one, it’s relatively painless to support all of them. So what is your enterprise sales story - even for small startups? Even if you work at a company that gives everyone a yearly stipend to get almost anything they want that will improve their work, you still have to get approval for any tool where the company’s info is sent to a third party. These are all things that most people don’t think about when they want to turn their passion product into a business I like your website design, especially the two-column layout in most sections once I get past the hero image (full size screenshot). I found myself looking at all the images. The downside is that I did not really get any motivation to try it out or really understand how it could help me. I am a backend software engineer so I'm always on the lookout for a way to easily and simply create a professional looking landing page. Therefore I'm always asking the question... is there a template I can choose from and just start filling it in? Just yesterday I found a figma template hosted on figma.site and I used chrome devtools to edit the hero text and navbar and got instant results .. as in I sort of liked it. Typography, spacing, use of color, detailed data presentation (ie bullet points, 2 column layout, etc), and fill-in images are my starting point (as an amateur designer). I could spend hours tweaking a design but I would rather just copy some existing component designs and call it a day. Hope this helps. Godspeed! This is the software design philosophy that I support! As someone building my own design utility, I'm impressed by the quality of yours. My biggest issue with Figma and most vector apps is how they handle groups. Only Illustrator seems to offer group isolation. You can double click on a group, enter the group and just edit the elements inside that group. It's such a simple feature but it massively improves the workflow of working with vectors. Never understood why Figma, Sketch, or Affinity Designer never implemented it. Any chance this will be open-sourced or have a self-hosted version available? I'm interested in modding tools in this space in pursuit of finding weird new ways to create and work with UIs If you're looking for an open-source and self-host option then you might to checkout https://penpot.app/ How does it compare to https://github.com/penpot/penpot? Thanks for this question. I'm humbled by the comparison. I have been following penpot for a while and I appreciate the work they've been doing. The main difference lies in the rendering engine. Penpot relies on an SVG engine, which limits performance as project complexity grows. Vecti is built on canvas and WebAssembly (the same architecture used by Figma). This gives us raw performance advantages, allowing you to handle complex, heavy design systems without the lag you might experience in SVG-based tools. Maybe its obvious but I can't tell it this is an image editor, a React builder, an HTML/CSS designer, ...? What does it make? It's a wireframing tool akin to figma. You create the design for your website/app there, then hand it over to a programmer who implementd it in html/react/flutter/wpf/etc Congrats on your launch! My impression is that this looks quite polished. Can you elaborate on your tech stack? Thanks! On the frontend: typescript, react, webgl with an emscripten/c++/wasm engine On the backend:
Python, postgres, redis Nice. My gripe with designer apps is that they are online first. I'd want to save designs to files, close to other files of the project. I'd want to open each file in their own window, not in browser tabs. Congrats on launching, looks cool for sure, I'll certainly check it out! Have you considered adding an MCP server? I've had good results recently using the Figma one just An MCP server is definitely on my radar. I've seen some really cool workflows coming out of Figma too. Being a one-man show though, prioritizing what to build next is always the tough part. But it's on the list, appreciate your suggestion! Comparing this to penpot, which is free as long as you self-host. Not sure why I would pick this over a self-hostable battle-tested option. It looks really nice, but it is subscription based, so ... no thanks. I refuse to give in to this horrible cycle started by Adobe, lo so many years ago. Trying to login with google I got a social auth error: https://app.vecti.com/dashboard/social-auth-error/ I wait for someone to comment that he could pull it off with an Opus 4.6 agent team in 24h of so. Love the domain name. How did you manage to snag it? When I started the project I was having a hard time finding a good domain name for the project. Some time later, I came up with this name, and found it for sale on some website for ~800€. I figured it was something I could do, but fortunately I ended up on dynadot's website where it was for sale for a fraction of the price.
I think I got lucky while doing all the work :) Beautiful design! (makes sense for someone that does UI design). Congrats, I'll check it out. Just tested a few things and I gotta say its fairly easy to pick up and do things. UI does feel like Figma for better or worse. Congrats on completing this project and good luck. It's beautiful. Great job. Congrats on having the persistence to see this through. Ex-Figma. I'd be worried about a lawsuit here, primarily due to the overall app architecture and property panel on the right. While there are differences between your implementation and Figma's, it's close enough that things are very clearly Figma-inspired. There've been a lot of Figma copycats, and Figma does have a track record of successful lawsuits against them. Great work with the backend architecture (a lack of a proper wasm renderer is why penpot will never be competitive), but you're in dangerous territory with the UI. Wasn't Figma's side panel just a ripoff of Sketch's? Always felt that way. Heavily influenced by Sketch's UX for sure. Sketch paved the way for the new wave of design tools. There were some significant architectural differences between the approaches though. Just for comparison, here's a side by side of each: https://image.non.io/940a433a-3c25-4610-88e8-4eec810f2235.we... I think you're 4 years too late bro. With AI, you can pretty much get 80% of the way there in a minute. I don't understand why anyone nowadays would build anything from scratch. With so many ready meals to choose from I don't understand why anyone nowadays would cook anything from scratch.
crazygringo - 6 hours ago
nielsbot - 6 hours ago
dvt - 5 hours ago
linkregister - 3 hours ago
nerdsniper - 36 minutes ago
reactordev - 6 hours ago
nielsbot - an hour ago
thfuran - 5 hours ago
dotancohen - 2 hours ago
Zopieux - 2 hours ago
crazygringo - an hour ago
cwmoore - 2 hours ago
TheGRS - 2 hours ago
cosmic_cheese - 5 hours ago
Hammershaft - an hour ago
Alex63 - 5 hours ago
conductr - 3 hours ago
PeterStuer - 5 hours ago
vitaflo - 3 hours ago
crazygringo - 2 hours ago
drob518 - 2 hours ago
FridgeSeal - 6 minutes ago
socalgal2 - 2 hours ago
james2doyle - 6 hours ago
dotancohen - 2 hours ago
roberthahn - 5 hours ago
dlcarrier - 5 hours ago
roberthahn - 5 hours ago
AlienRobot - 5 hours ago
socalgal2 - 2 hours ago
mylastattempt - 5 hours ago
AlienRobot - 4 hours ago
wavemode - 4 hours ago
dlcarrier - 5 hours ago
drob518 - 2 hours ago
dotancohen - 2 hours ago
crazygringo - an hour ago
TonyStr - 5 hours ago
vecti - 4 hours ago
TonyStr - 3 hours ago
cadamsdotcom - 3 hours ago
gyomu - 3 hours ago
TonyStr - 3 hours ago
mortenjorck - 2 hours ago
g947o - 3 hours ago
fastThinking - 4 hours ago
bryanhogan - an hour ago
TonyStr - 3 hours ago
johnwheeler - 4 hours ago
TonyStr - 3 hours ago
popalchemist - 4 hours ago
danielvaughn - 6 hours ago
vecti - 6 hours ago
uxcolumbo - 5 hours ago
cobertos - 6 hours ago
danielvaughn - 5 hours ago
airlocksoftware - 4 hours ago
danielvaughn - 4 hours ago
raw_anon_1111 - 4 hours ago
shawabawa3 - 4 hours ago
raw_anon_1111 - 4 hours ago
conductr - 3 hours ago
raw_anon_1111 - 3 hours ago
conductr - 2 hours ago
raw_anon_1111 - 2 hours ago
jonnycoder - 2 hours ago
catapart - 5 hours ago
pier25 - 2 hours ago
cobertos - 6 hours ago
uxcolumbo - 5 hours ago
tarcon - 6 hours ago
vecti - 5 hours ago
contrast - 6 hours ago
TonyStr - 5 hours ago
codethief - 6 hours ago
vecti - 3 hours ago
aerzen - 5 hours ago
jmkni - 6 hours ago
vecti - 5 hours ago
ramon156 - 5 hours ago
NoSalt - 4 hours ago
amadeuspagel - 5 hours ago
tuhgdetzhh - 3 hours ago
jasonsb - 5 hours ago
vecti - 4 hours ago
willparks - 6 hours ago
falloutx - 6 hours ago
popalchemist - 6 hours ago
jjcm - 4 hours ago
vitaflo - 3 hours ago
jjcm - 2 hours ago
thrownaway561 - 5 hours ago
augustk - 2 hours ago
