5 ms·

For software that the developer can update instantly (an OS update doesn't count), then yes, this is a great methodology to live by. Hardware is a completely di

For software that the developer can update instantly (an OS update doesn't count), then yes, this is a great methodology to live by. Hardware is a completely different beast, and costs significantly more for the purchaser and should be tested to extreme levels before launching.

thaumaturgy 15y ago
I've yet to be won over to the fast-iteration model of software (or product) development, mostly because I think that presenting an unfinished, or unpolished, product to a customer is usually a bad idea. Even if you get it right later, the customer is still going to be left with a poor first impression. Apple, despite their faults, is a great example of this: the majority of their products are carefully polished and finished, with a lot of attention to detail. Obviously a company doesn't want to sit on a new product for too long, trying to perfect it before releasing it, and obviously a company should continue to improve its products and services continuously, preferably at a nice, steady rate. But, I'm steadfastly opposed to shipping unfinished products. I think it's bad advice every time I hear it or read it, and I think the negative parts of this review are a good example of why.
- hboon 15y ago
  I know you mentioned fast-iteration, but you also mentioned MVP in your earlier comment, so I thought I refer to that. When Apple first released iPhone, there wasn't an SDK publicly available. There wasn't copy and paste. There was also only EDGE/GPRS support, no multitasking (of any form except for a few built-in apps), no third party apps, no MMS, no SMS forwarding, no group SMS. It was only available in the US and only for AT&T subscribers. In many sense of the term, it is an MVP and it worked. It's just an MVP that was very polished. As it rolled out releases, there were both enhancements and spots where they aren't as polished which was improved in a later release. Push Notifications in 3.0 + the coming Notifications center in 5.0 comes to mind. So, they did an MVP with iPhone, initial features were minimum, but a selected subset of them are extremely polished. In fact if you look at many successful iPhone apps, this seems to be a very successful model. Perhaps this approach only works on Apple's "target market". But I'd like to think this is an excellent approach when working with mass market consumers. This link where Steve Jobs commented about Segway's marketing and launch is not totally relevant, but still interesting - http://hbswk.hbs.edu/archive/3533.html http://hbswk.hbs.edu/archive/3533.html

thaumaturgy 15y ago

I've yet to be won over to the fast-iteration model of software (or product) development, mostly because I think that presenting an unfinished, or unpolished, product to a customer is usually a bad idea. Even if you get it right later, the customer is still going to be left with a poor first impression. Apple, despite their faults, is a great example of this: the majority of their products are carefully polished and finished, with a lot of attention to detail. Obviously a company doesn't want to sit on a new product for too long, trying to perfect it before releasing it, and obviously a company should continue to improve its products and services continuously, preferably at a nice, steady rate. But, I'm steadfastly opposed to shipping unfinished products. I think it's bad advice every time I hear it or read it, and I think the negative parts of this review are a good example of why.

hboon 15y ago
I know you mentioned fast-iteration, but you also mentioned MVP in your earlier comment, so I thought I refer to that. When Apple first released iPhone, there wasn't an SDK publicly available. There wasn't copy and paste. There was also only EDGE/GPRS support, no multitasking (of any form except for a few built-in apps), no third party apps, no MMS, no SMS forwarding, no group SMS. It was only available in the US and only for AT&T subscribers. In many sense of the term, it is an MVP and it worked. It's just an MVP that was very polished. As it rolled out releases, there were both enhancements and spots where they aren't as polished which was improved in a later release. Push Notifications in 3.0 + the coming Notifications center in 5.0 comes to mind. So, they did an MVP with iPhone, initial features were minimum, but a selected subset of them are extremely polished. In fact if you look at many successful iPhone apps, this seems to be a very successful model. Perhaps this approach only works on Apple's "target market". But I'd like to think this is an excellent approach when working with mass market consumers. This link where Steve Jobs commented about Segway's marketing and launch is not totally relevant, but still interesting - http://hbswk.hbs.edu/archive/3533.html http://hbswk.hbs.edu/archive/3533.html