The article makes some good points, but at the same time, hiring somebody to built the first version of your product is maybe even harder. Especially if you don't have a technical background it is really hard to judge whether what they built makes any sense. The initial trade-offs of what to built and where to take short-cuts requires somebody with technical insight. That first proto-type that you are building to throw away ends of course up being the first product you ship.
back
2 comments
> That first proto-type that you are building to throw away ends of course up being the first product you ship.
This is a good thing to remember. I'd also add that at best the prototype ends up as the Ship of Theseus, it may gradually be replaced piece by piece. The idea that you'll have a chance to re-build the entire thing starting at 0 is a myth. True prototypes are possible within the product, but not the product itself.
Anyone considering joining or starting a start-up (business and technical side) should be aware of that and plan accordingly.
Yes I think it's useful to let go of the idea of the prototype altogether, and think of the app as a set of "n" modular apps/services that will be swapped out/improved later over time.
I thoroughly hated our video player but an MVP of it had to be built for the rest of the app (AI video editor) to even make sense.
And that hated video player ended up being part of the product for 18+ months (I was hoping for <6) because there were much more valuable parts of the app to improve.