This is one of those conversations that has been going on for decades (if not centuries or millennia). If your life involves making something in private, then p

This is one of those conversations that has been going on for decades (if not centuries or millennia). If your life involves making something in private, then putting it out there for other people to see/buy/whatever, every such project requires you to decide when its done and ready for the world. Getting it out there sooner can be appealing if time is a factor. Spending extra time perfecting it is appealing if time is not a factor. It's just two poles between which you set a cutoff point, and in team efforts everyone will not only have different ideas about whether time or quality is more important, but they will have different perceptions about what it even means to be closer to one pole. You're always compromising something in engineering, no matter which pole exerts a stronger pull on you. Putting a flawed product out early might kill the product; you should've put the development time cutoff point closer to the 'perfection' pole. On the other hand, spending extra weeks or months or years polishing something that ends up not being not quite what anyone wanted is also bad, because if you had just gotten something out there sooner, you could've spent the same amount of time iterating on it in response to feedback. Lots of extra time spent on something often also translates into getting locked into technical choices that can be more difficult to back out of later if necessary. So there's definitely something to be said for putting a simpler and less-polished product out sooner to get feedback and test your initial assumptions vs. reality. I think these conversations never cease in part because so many people who argue about this stuff are treating it as a binary choice. They're not picking a cutoff point between two poles, they're picking a pole and going all in on it. In reality, they see different sets of pros and cons and weight them differently and see risk differently. The solution is better communication between people so that there is at least a shared set of known pros and cons. People might still not agree, but they can at least have the same conversation when weighing compromises. People who get into binary thinking patterns about situations which no one person fully grasps are being rational in their own way; they just don't understand that they are compromising something else. In my experience, people rarely see things in black and white once they understand how the opposing side views the situation. Both sides are rational, they just have disjoints areas of knowledge and thus priorities.