
Demos, Prototypes, and MVPs - _quhg
https://jacobian.org/2020/jan/16/demos-prototypes-mvps/
======
goblin89
> if your product is a wedding cake, your MVP is a single layer

I rather prefer the analogy put forward by Intercom: try to cupcake it
instead[0], have a finished mini-version of the product instead of just one
layer of the full version.

I believe the idea is the same as Nikki’s, just the analogy possibly more apt.

[0] [https://www.intercom.com/blog/start-with-a-
cupcake/](https://www.intercom.com/blog/start-with-a-cupcake/)

~~~
ealexhudson
I don't personally think any of this is right. A good synonym for "MVP" should
be "experiment": you're trying to test something.

So a cupcake might be a suitable MVP, but you're either trying to confirm the
basic flavour is fine (so single layer is OK), or maybe the combination of
flavours is fine (multiple layers plus icing?) or maybe the overall
look/design of the cake (in which case a cupcake is wrong, you need at least
one large layer, but maybe's it's a sponge rather than fruitcake because
that's easier/cheaper)

If you already know in some detail what the "final product" will be, then
there's not a lot of point doing an MVP. The MVP is there to learn about what
the final product should be. It's not supposed to be a go/no-go test on
whether the final product is correct.

~~~
boublepop
> A good synonym for "MVP" should be "experiment"

You are focusing solely on the M and forgetting VP. If something isn’t a
Viable Product then it isn’t a Minimal Viable Product.

You could create an MVP as an “experiment”, but it can’t be synonyms because
not every experiment is even a product or a viable product and thus not at all
a MVP.

~~~
ealexhudson
But the "viable product" bit is the hypothesis you're testing.

If you're saying "before you release it, it has to be believable as a product"
\- I think I basically agree with that, and for sure, that's a subset of the
total things that might be "experiments" (because you can experiment with
individual features, and stuff like that).

I suppose there are two ways of reading the word "viable", either "does this
look sufficiently like a product?" or "is a product with this basic concept
likely to thrive in the marketplace?". I think too many people focus on the
former and not the latter.

------
sriku
I've found it useful to dereference words when they sound ambiguous. In the
case of MVP, "minimum" is clear, "viable" is also fairly clear, "product" has
been a candidate to get stuck on. I usually replace it with "something someone
(a user) is willing to pay money for".

edit: .. assuming the idea of "MVP" is valuable.

------
lucasverra
The skateboard analogy comes from spotify’s literature on product.

It does make sens on the UX side but it takes energy/ressources to figure out
your product/market.

In the skateboard approach, if you selling mobility (from A > B), then the
skateboard is the mvp.

If you are selling mobility for a family, then it is not.

~~~
swagasaurus-rex
Great point. Perhaps it should be called a 'Minimum viable solution to a
problem people will pay for'.

