I love that they complain that MVP is not a good approach and that SLC is better and clearer, but "simple" and "complete" can be antagonistic forces and create

I love that they complain that MVP is not a good approach and that SLC is better and clearer, but "simple" and "complete" can be antagonistic forces and create the same amount of ambiguity as the interaction between "minimum" and "viable." I imagine you are looking at complete and read it as saying everything must be done right the first time, while the author likely would respond with "no you are missing the point it should also be simple." But I might agree with your interpretation, as would a lot of other people, meaning its ambiguous and potentially less meaningful. At least the ambiguity in MVP is less, it's the minimal product that is viable, which presumably does have an empirical, if perhaps unknowable, answer. It's a clear target. What is simple and complete though? I dont think theres a clear target there.