Panic's Cabel Sasser on "Maximum Viable Products"
1–10 of 19 posts
Re: Panic's Cabel Sasser on "Maximum Viable Products"
#2There is more than one way to achieve a positive result. I think a minimum viable product makes a lot of sense for an early stage startup that is still validating their idea on the market. For a well established product like Coda or TextMate, you usually want your next edition to satisfy many of the needs of existing customers and motivate them to upgrade. Of course, this is not to say that you can't still use the minimum viable product approach. You just can't rule out doing the opposite just because it's not Lean. For established companies it can work.
Re: Panic's Cabel Sasser on "Maximum Viable Products"
#3MVP is an approach for startups that navigate in unknown and very risky waters, not knowing if they will even have paying customers. Now, we could certainly discuss the merits and validity of MVP but what the Coda 2 team does - web dev app a la Dreamweaver - seems so opposite to what startups have to go through that it makes sense that they go for "maximum viable products". Also, once you move beyond the first big release of your product (which Coda 2 has) I'm not sure you can create a mvp anymore.
Re: Panic's Cabel Sasser on "Maximum Viable Products"
#4MVP is an approach for startups that navigate in unknown and very risky waters, not knowing if they will even have paying customers. Now, we could certainly discuss the merits and validity of MVP but what the Coda 2 team does - web dev app a la Dreamweaver - seems so opposite to what startups have to go through that it makes sense that they go for "maximum viable products". Also, once you move beyond the first big re…
I wanted to say I really like how you summed your thought up. You made a lot of sense, and I completely agree.
We created something that was first released as an MVP (and we made sure that was clear for our customers). Now that we know we have customers, and we know people are willing to pay... we're taking our time to make sure we do the rest of it right. And so far, our customers have been very understanding, patient, and helpful through the process. Something I didn't think would be the case.
*edit: typo
Re: Panic's Cabel Sasser on "Maximum Viable Products"
#5MVP is an approach for startups that navigate in unknown and very risky waters, not knowing if they will even have paying customers. Now, we could certainly discuss the merits and validity of MVP but what the Coda 2 team does - web dev app a la Dreamweaver - seems so opposite to what startups have to go through that it makes sense that they go for "maximum viable products". Also, once you move beyond the first big re…
You can use the MVP concept, even on a very mature product. You just have to adjust the scope of the idea. For example, my product has been in development for more than 10 years and has had 24 major releases. Yet when we are considering adding a new feature, we still scope the work in terms of the minimum usable version of the feature, as well as the "100% version", hopefully with a few reasonable steps in between. This enables us to focus on getting something useful out quickly, in order to validate the feature, while avoiding gold plating until we have that validation.
Re: Panic's Cabel Sasser on "Maximum Viable Products"
#6The problem I have with the Coda approach, which is shared by other IDEs (and plenty of other kinds of software too), is that the interface components are overly specific to particular workflows and environments, and each tool complects multiple features/concepts. This (a) makes it harder to learn each individual part, (b) makes composing those parts to meet personal needs more difficult, and (c) makes it so learning those tools doesn’t point toward anything greater – you can’t take what you learn with you to new environments that weren’t anticipated by the original tool authors. Additionally, these kinds of tools tend to isolate users from the systems underneath, creating dependency. I much prefer when tool-builders think long and hard about making simple, orthogonal tools, designed to be composed together to meet diverse needs. As long as the individual components are explorable, such tools teach their users more fundamental concepts and allow them to grow over time.
When implemented well, an environment like Coda can be very productive in the niches for which it was designed, but in only offering a standard workspace and set of tools to everyone, it denies users the chance to build their own workspaces and pick & hone their own tools. This infantilizes and shelters those users, limiting them in the longer term.
Re: Panic's Cabel Sasser on "Maximum Viable Products"
#7What the hell? This video is one minute long and has nothing insightful at all. This is more an ad for your website than anything.
Re: Panic's Cabel Sasser on "Maximum Viable Products"
#8Love this video!
The problem with this approach is if the market responds negatively. I feel this way right now with Coda 2, as it feels over designed and targeted at an odd-case web developer. I truly hope I'm wrong with Coda 2.
But the point remains, if you swing for the fences and miss with a MAXVP then don't be surprised if you go back to the minor leagues. (I made a sports reference nearly successfully...I'm calling everyone I know!)
Re: Panic's Cabel Sasser on "Maximum Viable Products"
#9Panic really needs to keep its mouth shut about MVP.
It is not some tiny startup. They are one of the leading 'shareware' makers on the Mac platform. And the fact is that Coda 2 is a buggy mess with many of its key features completely unusable. I fail to see how with this sort of approach it is going to ever build customer loyalty.
Re: Panic's Cabel Sasser on "Maximum Viable Products"
#10MVP is an approach for startups that navigate in unknown and very risky waters, not knowing if they will even have paying customers. Now, we could certainly discuss the merits and validity of MVP but what the Coda 2 team does - web dev app a la Dreamweaver - seems so opposite to what startups have to go through that it makes sense that they go for "maximum viable products". Also, once you move beyond the first big re…
You can use the MVP concept, even on a very mature product. You just have to adjust the scope of the idea. For example, my product has been in development for more than 10 years and has had 24 major releases. Yet when we are considering adding a new feature, we still scope the work in terms of the minimum usable version of the feature, as well as the "100% version", hopefully with a few reasonable steps in between. T…
I hope anyone who is building a startup never listens to your advice.
Putting the minimum effort in and building effectively mediocre features is not how you build customer loyalty and excitement in the market place. And it makes it very easy for competitors to go after you. Sure you should keep the scope tight but you should try and at least make it highly usable. Even if its just so you can sleep at night knowing you made something great.