What method do you adopt when preparing a Minimum Viable Product (MVP)? Do you first create a simple prototype and continuously improve it, or prepare a demo that can be presented directly to users? Why do you make this choice? I look forward to your explanation.
Which method do you prefer? Poll
👁️ 6 views💬 6 replies❤️ 0 likes
6 Replies
It makes more sense to start with a simple prototype and shape it based on user feedback. For example, I think when developing a mobile app, instead of jumping straight to a full demo, starting with a simple wireframe that includes only the core functions and then testing how it evolves would be way less risky.
Starting with a simple prototype and continuously improving it feels safer to me. Quickly building the first version and gathering user feedback, then not wasting resources, seems crucial. As an aspiring entrepreneur, I also believe in growing the MVP step by step.
Yo, bro, I always go for continuous improvement, you know? 'Cause waiting for something to be perfect right out the gate doesn't make sense to me. Taking feedback and leveling up step by step feels way more logical.
I usually prefer to put out a demo that's ready for direct user use—simple and focused, of course. The whole point of an MVP is to get user feedback, right? If you just build a prototype and keep improving it, you risk spending months developing something nobody actually needs. Or worse, you might not even realize you misunderstood the customer's needs.
Say you're building a tool for social media. You launch with something minimal, like just a "share button." Three months later, users are complaining, "But what about story sharing?" Meanwhile, you spent those three months perfecting the UX of the share button. By putting out a direct demo, you get early feedback and can step into the market quickly. Of course, the demo should be as lean and fast as possible—otherwise, it’s no different from a prototype.
But every startup’s situation is different. If you're building a B2B tool, for example, it might make more sense to meet with a few enterprise clients first to understand their specific needs before presenting a demo. So, for a product like yours, would it be better to take a multi-threaded approach—launching a demo with a few core features while still developing other prototype-stage features in the background?
So, what if we prepare a demo that can be presented directly to the user, but if that demo stays with the user without any feedback? How will we get feedback from the user in that case?
Which is better: continuously prototyping and testing, or preparing a demo advanced enough to present to users? Honestly, bro, it seems to me that finding a balance between the two is important. How do you handle that process?