Somanath Studio
Back to Writing
Technology DecisionsSaaSConsultingArchitectureHow We Work

How I Choose Technology for Client Projects (And When I Say No)

How I Choose Technology for Client Projects (And When I Say No)

One of the biggest fears founders have isn’t development speed.
It’s making the wrong technical decision early and paying for it later.

This article explains how I choose technology for client projects — and just as importantly, when I deliberately say no.

Not because I can’t build something, but because I’m protecting the product.


Why “Latest Tech” Is Often a Mistake

New tools are exciting.
But excitement is not a business requirement.

In real projects, choosing the latest framework often leads to:

  • Smaller talent pool
  • Immature ecosystems
  • Unexpected edge cases
  • Higher maintenance cost
  • Slower onboarding for future developers

That doesn’t mean new tech is bad — it means context matters.

Technology should reduce risk, not introduce it.


How Project Stage Affects Tech Choice

I don’t choose tech in isolation.
I choose it based on where the product is right now.

Early-stage / MVP

  • Speed matters
  • Clarity matters
  • Simplicity wins
  • Proven tools are safer

Growth-stage

  • Performance starts to matter
  • Structure and scalability matter
  • Observability and maintainability matter

Scale-stage

  • Cost efficiency matters
  • Operational complexity matters
  • Team velocity matters more than novelty

The same tech stack is rarely ideal for every stage.


When Next.js Is the Right Choice (And When It’s Not)

I use Next.js often — but not blindly.

Next.js works best when:

  • SEO is important
  • You need server + client flexibility
  • You want a single unified web platform
  • You’re building a long-term product

I avoid or reconsider Next.js when:

  • The app is purely internal
  • SEO has zero value
  • The product is a short-lived experiment
  • The complexity outweighs the benefits

No framework is “always correct.”


When I Reject Client Requests

This is where trust matters.

I push back when:

  • A tool is chosen only because it’s trending
  • A stack adds complexity without real benefit
  • A request increases long-term cost for short-term gain
  • A decision will make hiring or scaling harder later

Saying “yes” to everything is easy.
Saying “no” when it matters is what protects the product.


Long-Term Cost vs Short-Term Speed

Fast delivery is important.
But fast mistakes are expensive.

Every tech decision has hidden costs:

  • Maintenance
  • Hiring
  • Infrastructure
  • Refactoring
  • Onboarding

My goal is to balance:

  • Shipping quickly now
  • Staying flexible later

That balance is where good products survive.


The Result of This Approach

This way of working leads to:

  • Fewer rewrites
  • Lower long-term cost
  • Easier team scaling
  • More predictable delivery
  • Stronger trust with founders

It also filters out projects that aren’t ready to be built properly — which is intentional.


Final Thoughts

I don’t build projects to show off tools.
I build them to last.

Technology is a means, not an identity.

If you want a partner who:

  • Questions assumptions
  • Chooses tools responsibly
  • Pushes back when needed
  • Thinks beyond the first release

Then this is how I work.


Call to Action

If you want someone who chooses technology with your business in mind, let’s talk.
Good decisions early save years later.

Working on a SaaS that’s starting to feel slow or brittle?

I help founders refactor early decisions into scalable, production-ready systems — without full rewrites.