Every side project I have ever attempted has taken me ages and never got anywhere. Saying things like localisation need to be done before your MVP ready is nuts.
I'm working on a side project right now. I've tried to learn all my lessons from other attempts. It's just a basic website (landing page). Between building that, trying to sort out product, make a plan, etc - there is barely any time left... I have a full time 9-6 job, and a two hour (total) commute. There's hardly any time left at the end of the day, squeezing out an hours work each day is hard enough. Localisation would never be on my list.
Having the time to check each one of these points is a luxury most side projects can't afford.
1) Does it work in a bunch of sizes on laptop/desktop monitor?
2) Is it readable/usable on my iPhone?
3) Does www.mysite.com and mysite.com work?
4) Do I list contact info for someone to reach out to me?
5) Do I have some way of capturing signups?
6) Do I have a google analytics snippet working?
7) Is my static content behind a CDN so I don't go down in an easily avoidable manner?
I like to leave this checklist open ended since my definition of 'working' on mobile vs. desktop depends on the project. If I'm throwing an event, it's very important that people are able to register on mobile...if I'm launching an e-commerce store, they might not need to buy but just add their email address.
For a side project you'd probably be better off putting much more basic things like 'does it work on mobile', 'do the email addresses listed actually work', 'is robots.txt still set to disallow google' and 'have you actually gone through a whole order yet' on there. Seriously.
That's actually a better term! It makes a difference whether you are building the side project as a creative hobby (to develop new skills etc.) or in the hopes of turning it into a startup.
If I was making a similar list it'd be something like:
1. Does the product do something useful yet?
As soon as the answer is "yes" then you should launch. That's it.
But failing to launch of a month while you 'polish' things will make a difference. You'll lose out on feedback, potential customers, and give more foothold to any competition. Plus it's boring and expensive to not launch.
People who'll walk away because there's a spelling mistake on the contact page would never become paying users regardless of how great your product is. Ignore those people.
To go a bit off-topic, I actually tried to follow the "don't use color alone to provide information" for the static diff on diff.so/about, but I couldn't find a way to get ChromeVox to read text on one side of the diff any differently than text on the other. I'd be really interested in any advice on that - it seems like some screenreader users could use something a little more user-friendly than emacs.
The goal of your side project makes a difference I suppose. People build side projects, either as creative hobbies, or some in the hopes of turning them into startups.
Nice site btw.! :)
How about doing a poll to get the most important points and apply the Pareto principle?
You could add a total (15 points out 40 todos) to make it even more useful.
Personally I would just title it as "Website Launch". I do side projects which are for self-learning or help a few friends. They are useful for a few users but they are not meant to serve hundreds or millions of users.
The fact is, your first version should be shitty and you should release while you are still embarrassed about it. There's no numbers on this because they would be impossible to get, but I would assume over 90% of projects never see the light of day because most people never get it to that perfect state that they wish to launch at. Don't be one of those people, launch and get feedback ASAP.
I've been struggling with making things 'look clickable' on my website (or maybe everything is fine and it's in my head). To solve this I've been trying to define what exactly makes a user want to click something. The most common methods are the blue link color, underlining, or a 'more/click me' button. I don't want to do any of those - wanting someone to click content is more desirable than telling them to.
In researching other sites and monitoring my own behavior I noticed that I always want to click images. This probably has to do with being a long time image-board browser. But the content I want to be clicked doesn't have any images associated with them. I've been trying to work in glyphicons that indicate a link, but it messes with the aesthetics of the content.
I would, but I want an entire paragraph (title header + body) to be clickable. It looks pretty bad if the entire thing is underlined, and just underlining the header makes it look like a decoration and not a link. The cursor does change but there's no cursor on a touchscreen.
A user isn't going to click anything unless they know they can click it. You have to tell them they can click it before they can want to click on it. And the easiest way to do that is with the blue color or the underline.
First, it's basically a list of minor nit-picky random things rather than a thoughtful list of essentials. How is "Pages don't refresh automatically" on the list, but, "Buy an SSL certificate" is not?
Second, many of these things would be total waste of time pre-launch. If you have zero people buying your product and you spend your time perfecting "Currency, language, country specific deals, taxes" then your perspective is way out of whack.
It feels to me like this list was put together by a committee of people who read TechCrunch everyday, but have never actually launched any side projects.
It was the first thing I noticed when I clicked on the link. Perhaps to many audiences this isn't important but I know for some it really does matter.