Split Product Focus Between Wordware and Sauna

This setup matters because Wordware is trying to win a market that rewards obsessive focus on one habit loop, not two products at once. Wordware v1 sells a builder to people who want to design workflows, while Sauna sells a memory rich assistant to people who want work handled for them. Those products demand different onboarding, support, roadmap choices, and brand promise, which can slow how fast Sauna learns from repeated user behavior and turns that into durable product advantage.

• Wordware v1 is still a real business, with paid tiers from $39 to $1,999 and features like 2,000 plus integrations, triggers, loops, and bring your own key support. Keeping that revenue engine healthy means continuing platform work that does not directly deepen Sauna's assistant memory and task execution loop.
  1 sacra 2 sacra
• The pivot was not a light packaging change. The team rebuilt around a different buyer and a different product job. Management concluded that most users did not want to build agents, they wanted outcomes, then shifted from infrastructure to a prosumer assistant with its own workspace, memory system, and background task engine.
  1 sacra 2 sacra
• Comparable products show why focus matters. Cursor won in vibe coding by becoming an end to end destination, while Notion, ChatGPT, and Glean are each concentrating on one primary control point, workspace, assistant, or enterprise knowledge layer. In that kind of race, split attention usually shows up as weaker onboarding and slower product compounding.
  1 sacra 2 sacra 4 sacra

The likely path forward is a gradual conversion of Wordware v1 from core identity into feeder channel, cash generator, or legacy platform, while Sauna becomes the center of product and brand gravity. If that happens, every new user action, every saved preference, and every recurring task can reinforce one context system, which is how assistant products become harder to replace over time.