
Prototypes vs. MVPs - nancyhua
http://pathsensitive.blogspot.com/2015/10/the-prototype-stereotype.html
======
kbenson
> Some people walk into Jesse Schell’s Game Design class expecting an easy
> time, and are shocked to find themselves pulling multiple all-nighters for a
> class where getting a 100% on everything is only enough for a B. But those
> that persevere find themselves with new worldviews on everything from sleep
> to applied probability theory, and learn why there’s no such thing as a
> prototype app.

Well, if they are sleep deprived, at least he's preparing them for the real
world.

But I can't help thinking that maybe if the class allows people to only get a
B for getting 100% on everything then it is very poorly structured, or
catering to the wrong people.

Also, maybe we shouldn't be teaching people that it's okay to expect
unreasonable things just because it's what the industry norm is. Maybe if
enough people think it's ridiculous to work all night for arbitrary deadlines,
things might actually change.

~~~
betadreamer
I have some insights on this. I took Building Virtual World from CMU that is
taught by Jesse and other faculties but the structure is the same.

They don't give credit on how many all-nighters you took to build something or
how hard you tried. Instead they value how "complete" your product is.
Students (myself included) tend to build something pretty ambitious in
relatively small amount of time and ended up making a prototype that kind of
works/don't. They want you to learn that you need to estimate better and
deliver something simple/complete and not something that is ambitious/complex
that is not quite working.

You can imagine I got a B in that class :P

~~~
derefr
In other words, a "microgame" (in the WarioWare sense) that you've polished
the hell out of would get a better grade?

------
TheGRS
I was following the logic of this post up until this part:

> In 2008, Dropbox hit a key milestone on the path to their MVP when they
> released a video demonstrating their product. Tens of thousands joined the
> waiting list. So actually, the minimum viable product was the video itself

I'm not sure if I agree with this, because its suggesting that all you really
need to prove your idea is smoke and mirrors. If Dropbox didn't have anything
behind its video, we'd see a huge backlash from angry viewers wondering why
they made the video before the product. I was under the assumption that an MVP
allows you to get your product out quickly and change it with feedback. Not
just for proving that your idea is widely desired.

~~~
nostrademons
It took DropBox about a year _after_ publishing the video before they had a
launched product that the general public could use.

I used to be similarly uncomfortable about the "publish a fake product before
you've actually built it" tactic. But I've since signed up for 3 products that
didn't actually exist at the time - DropBox, RescueTime, and some analytics
SaaS done by ex-Googlers - and each time my emotion was more mild annoyance
rather than harsh anger. Heck, there's a whole industry (crowdfunding) now
based around the idea of selling a product that doesn't exist yet and then
using the money to fund development & manufacturing.

This is also not a new tactic - in the 80s, it was common for enterprise
software companies to find an initial company, sell them the product, and then
use the money to build the product. Microsoft did this with DOS - they sold
IBM an operating system that didn't exist and then used the money to find
someone who had written an OS for the 8088 and buy it from them.

~~~
crpatino
Crowdfunding works because you already know you are helping bring on a cool
product that would not exist otherwise (and are aware of the risk that it
might not pan out anyways).

Being asked politely and in an upfront way makes all the difference.

------
gerdydog
In my opinion a prototype is used to prove there is a market for your product
and attract seed investment.

An MVP is then created with the help of that seed investment and launched to
help greater substantiate your product and attract further funding.

The Dropbox video is a good idea. It may not be a prototype but it created
enough hype for them to show investors that there was a market and demand for
what they were building. My only concern is that if you are creating a product
in a new market you are potentially giving away a lot of your first mover
advantage with that tactic.

------
ricksplat
A prototype is not a product.

A prototype is an idealised example that demonstrates a concept or a set of
concepts.

A product is a real instance of these concepts packaged up as something that a
customer will use and pay for.

It is perfectly fine to provide prototypes as part of the development process
as proof of concept. You can show them to your customers or test audience as
demonstrations of what you expect your final product to look like and that
you've correctly understood their needs.

A prototype is also suitable as a totem for team discussions to help develop
understanding of an as-yet poorly understood problem domain.

Product is the embodiment of these prototypes, and all the other material such
as documentation, packaging, independent certification, quality control,
licensing ...

All Minimal Viable Product is is the embodiment of "just enough" of the
prototype stuff to be useful to your customer, but all the other stuff is
still required.

Prototype is Inspiration (1%), if you like, and Product is Perspiration (99%)*

The paradox of MVP is that you're really just saving on that 1% but the other
99% still has to be done with very little variation in the effort required.
What's more if you're building for a single customer MVP is just their
requirements and nothing more, if you're building for a set of customers, then
MVP as opposed to P is just a case of deciding which customers you don't care
about.

(* Maybe it's more like 30/70 or 50/50 but I was echoing the popular trope)

