> The product tries to do too much. Not necessarily. It could be the product was designed around many different facets - user stories, bug reports, marketing r

> The product tries to do too much. Not necessarily. It could be the product was designed around many different facets - user stories, bug reports, marketing requests, safety standards. Then there's the stuff you don't necessarily control, like cost controls and deadlines. At the end of it there's quality control, and that's where these things usually fall down. You can make a super duper fancy coffee maker that won't die after 3 months. But you need the QC to ensure quality at scale. 90% of the defects might be easy to solve, but the last 10% might be too costly/time-consuming. If only 1 in 1000 will have a defect, it might be simpler/cheaper to replace the defective ones than do the QC to prevent it. You don't have to have a simple design for reliability. But the more complex it is, the more quality control is necessary to make it reliable. (I use an Aeropress, but that's because I only drink 1 cup... for more than 1, I'd probably go french press)