3 ms·

What you don't consider about the MVP is that you can release early/release often and then re-evaluate and improve upon it based on data, not your mind or guess

by dopp0 5y ago

What you don't consider about the MVP is that you can release early/release often and then re-evaluate and improve upon it based on data, not your mind or guesses. Taking 18 months to release it might cause you to waste a lot of valuable time with features/requirements that does not deliver any real value to your customer, and the competitors can gain this space delivering a much less complete product, with less quality, but with the right features because of MVP concepts. Not teasing in any way, but just 2 cents to consider, as I see a LOT of issues with the MVP approach.

ChrisMarshallNY 5y ago
Sorry that went dead. It was a perfectly valid point, but I suspect that the ”What you don’t consider about the MVP” is what earned the demerits (It comes across as an insulting assumption. As it turns out, I actually do consider it, but don’t agree). We’re not really supposed to do that. If you had prefaced with ”The classic rationale for MVP is…”, it probably would have passed muster. I understand the concept (It’s the standard MVP talking point), but read my response, above[0]. I am big on Quality. I also don’t think that we (software developers) get some kind of “get out of jail free” card, exempting us from the same rules that every other discipline has had to follow, since the dawn of time. It’s entirely possible to do it without delivering shoddy product. People have been doing exactly that, for centuries. There’s a long, long history of “guessing well.” Steve Jobs did that (He also “guessed badly,” frequently, but his good ideas worked out well). History is full of products and initiatives that worked well (and that didn’t). I don’t believe that it’s possible to democratize creativity. Some of us are more creative than others. I think that I'm “in the middle,” myself. I don’t really come up with “groundbreaking” ideas, like Steve Jobs. I tend to devise better ways to address classic problems, and actually have a fairly good track record, there. In any case, I just wrote about my approach, to software that I write. I wasn’t insisting that anyone else do it my way. If people don’t like it, they can vote with their feet. Folks have also been doing that, throughout human history. In my case, I am literally incapable of releasing a product that I don’t consider to be of the best Quality possible. I guess you could call it a “disability,” on my part (but I don’t). I’ve never been particularly interested in making a ton of money (most of my work is free, for nonprofits), or “going viral.” I have a craftsman approach to my work. I’m not competing with anyone else. In the past, I have actually withdrawn my own products, when others have developed ones that I considered better suited for our users. The stakes are too high for infighting. [0] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30823730 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30823730

by dopp0 5y ago

ChrisMarshallNY 5y ago

Sorry that went dead. It was a perfectly valid point, but I suspect that the ”What you don’t consider about the MVP” is what earned the demerits (It comes across as an insulting assumption. As it turns out, I actually do consider it, but don’t agree). We’re not really supposed to do that. If you had prefaced with ”The classic rationale for MVP is…”, it probably would have passed muster. I understand the concept (It’s the standard MVP talking point), but read my response, above[0]. I am big on Quality. I also don’t think that we (software developers) get some kind of “get out of jail free” card, exempting us from the same rules that every other discipline has had to follow, since the dawn of time. It’s entirely possible to do it without delivering shoddy product. People have been doing exactly that, for centuries. There’s a long, long history of “guessing well.” Steve Jobs did that (He also “guessed badly,” frequently, but his good ideas worked out well). History is full of products and initiatives that worked well (and that didn’t). I don’t believe that it’s possible to democratize creativity. Some of us are more creative than others. I think that I'm “in the middle,” myself. I don’t really come up with “groundbreaking” ideas, like Steve Jobs. I tend to devise better ways to address classic problems, and actually have a fairly good track record, there. In any case, I just wrote about my approach, to software that I write. I wasn’t insisting that anyone else do it my way. If people don’t like it, they can vote with their feet. Folks have also been doing that, throughout human history. In my case, I am literally incapable of releasing a product that I don’t consider to be of the best Quality possible. I guess you could call it a “disability,” on my part (but I don’t). I’ve never been particularly interested in making a ton of money (most of my work is free, for nonprofits), or “going viral.” I have a craftsman approach to my work. I’m not competing with anyone else. In the past, I have actually withdrawn my own products, when others have developed ones that I considered better suited for our users. The stakes are too high for infighting. [0] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30823730 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30823730