4 ms·

V1 is not important as far as design aesthetic goes. It can be totally rough and made of standard components. Function is much more important. Then you can t

V1 is not important as far as design aesthetic goes. It can be totally rough and made of standard components. Function is much more important. Then you can test it out in the field and go for customer acquisition. Once you've gathered feedback and have a proven (somewhat) potentially successful product you can work on design. Then, once you're in a position that says "Hey! This just might work!" you should have a list of designers you've already identified through their portfolio sites to contact about working for you. Really good design isn't cheap. It's an art. Mediocre design is cheap which means it's really expensive since you'll just throw it all away anyways.

albahk 16y ago
I agree in principle, most of the time. Consider though, certain sites will require good design from day one. A 'totally rough' site would not give you the credibility you need to even get started and acquire customer #1. The MVP mantra is valid, but cannot be applied in every case - especially when your core product involves good design or aesthetics. Sites where a rough MVP v1 would not work, IMO: http://sortfolio.com/ http://sortfolio.com/ http://dribbble.com/ http://dribbble.com/ http://www.shopify.com/ http://www.shopify.com/ http://www.weebly.com/ http://www.weebly.com/ I am interested to know about "..you should have a list of designers you've already identified..." i.e. any HN'ers care to share their lists?
- stephenou 16y ago
  I'm curious to hear what your definition is of a good looking and well-designed website/app. In my mind, a well-designed website is simply something that delivers functionality in an unobstructive way. What's wrong about the 4 websites listed above?
  - albahk 16y ago
    My meaning is that those sites listed above are well designed because they need to be. A designer won't pay money to list their company on a crap template monster website that you code up in a weekend. Having a good-looking website is required for the MVP rather than 6 months down the track when the "idea" is proven. My point is that some sites/startups need to look highly polished from day 1, even before you launch.

albahk 16y ago

I agree in principle, most of the time. Consider though, certain sites will require good design from day one. A 'totally rough' site would not give you the credibility you need to even get started and acquire customer #1. The MVP mantra is valid, but cannot be applied in every case - especially when your core product involves good design or aesthetics. Sites where a rough MVP v1 would not work, IMO: http://sortfolio.com/ http://sortfolio.com/ http://dribbble.com/ http://dribbble.com/ http://www.shopify.com/ http://www.shopify.com/ http://www.weebly.com/ http://www.weebly.com/ I am interested to know about "..you should have a list of designers you've already identified..." i.e. any HN'ers care to share their lists?

stephenou 16y ago
I'm curious to hear what your definition is of a good looking and well-designed website/app. In my mind, a well-designed website is simply something that delivers functionality in an unobstructive way. What's wrong about the 4 websites listed above?
- albahk 16y ago
  My meaning is that those sites listed above are well designed because they need to be. A designer won't pay money to list their company on a crap template monster website that you code up in a weekend. Having a good-looking website is required for the MVP rather than 6 months down the track when the "idea" is proven. My point is that some sites/startups need to look highly polished from day 1, even before you launch.