4 ms·
I think the term "minimum viable product" gets thrown around too glibly, as if it's the only way you can possibly be successful. If your goal is to be a better
by jarin 16y ago
I think the term "minimum viable product" gets thrown around too glibly, as if it's the only way you can possibly be successful.
If your goal is to be a better enough search engine than Google for people to want to switch to it, it's kind of pointless to release basic search as a product (take a look at Cuil for an example). I think Blekko did the right thing by waiting until they had features like slashtags (especially tags like /seo that appeal to early adopters) and some basic social interaction, which I would say gave them a "minimum compelling product".
- citizenkeys 16y agoThank you for mentioning "Cuil" by name. When I was reading the Blekko article, I was thinking "This reminds me of that search engine founded by former Googler's that bombed." I couldn't remember the name.
- _pius 16y agoI think the term "minimum viable product" gets thrown around too glibly, as if it's the only way you can possibly be successful. True. Minimum viable product is a strategy to mitigate market risk, not technology risk.