4 ms·
> Sort of, but... not really? In my experience, more resources means more polish and more scale. It's the usual 80/20 problem: with a small team you can get to
by hcarvalhoalves 2y ago
> Sort of, but... not really? In my experience, more resources means more polish and more scale. It's the usual 80/20 problem: with a small team you can get to 80%, but the last 20% bogs you down forever. Certainly large teams come with their own problems, but that last 20% is hard.
Consider this: AAPL is valued at 3.4 trillion USD. Both the polish and breadth of their software took a nose dive compared to early 2000s. There’s no more Aperture, Logic, Final Cut, Shake…
- aw1621107 2y agoI think it's GP probably intended something like "more resources spent". That aside, valuation doesn't seem like a meaningful metric in this context. It doesn't tell you how many resources are being spent on a given thing and it's not necessarily obvious whether that given thing is connected to the value either.
- hcarvalhoalves 2y agoExactly. My point is: a small team can have huge impact writing software. The biggest public company right now could be investing a rounding error on software, but chose not to.