My question is, do you consciously choose an indie maker over a larger software company? If you do, is this because you can often reach the founder of the SaaS you are using to solve problems you might experience in a product or is there another reason?
I've started to see this behaviour in myself (maybe because I am trying to be one). I'd love to hear from you all.
That doesn't mean they are rejected, but it means they must be world-class in their solutions and service to mitigate that risk. If they are, they will grow and become stable. You buy from small companies when they prove they have the capacity to be long-term viable solutions to your problem, not because they are 'indie'.
The more responsibility I give to the product, the more solid background it should have.
For example, if I had a company with 100 devs, and I need a to-do app for them, I won't choose small indie hacker product.
However for myself, I use them: screenshot taking apps, gif making apps, etc.
I also have a bias since I'm an indie maker and know the passion we put into our products.
You are right about the community too, it's one of the best people around who go to amazing lengths to help each other. This is one of the reasons why I would certainly prefer it.
It has to be products that I believe have product market fit. Often, I will deliberately make an effort to use them and give feedback (as my time allows).
There is obviously a risk with indie stuff that it will not be continued, but one could say that about Google products and/or traditional startups (e.g. Parse).
Often the price will naturally drive me to a smaller company, but I consider that as a bonus rather than one of the real "criteria" that went into the decision.