28/07/2025
💭 “Product development is always a linear process. If mine isn’t, something’s wrong.”
In reality, almost every project requires revisions.
Some things are clarified after testing with real users, some are adapted based on available components, and sometimes interface logic is reconsidered. Again, after receiving actual user feedback.
Iteration isn’t a failure or a sign of poor planning. It’s a way to respond to real-world constraints – technical, resource-related, user-driven – which evolve as more data, feedback, and understanding of what truly works become available.
💭 “The more features my product has, the more valuable it is.”
Every extra feature usually means more volume, a more complex layout, and higher power consumption.
As much as we’d like to, we can’t magically create more internal space, especially in wearable or compact devices.
Even if everything can be integrated technically, you might end up with something like those universal remotes: everything’s there on paper, but using it is a pain.
💭 “We can skip Discovery. We’re already short on time.”
This phase often gets met with skepticism. The common argument is: “We already have a spec, let’s just start.”
There’s a belief that nothing fundamentally new comes out of Discovery. Plus, it takes extra engineering hours, so the project gets longer and more expensive.
But Discovery is what lets you refine the task, spot constraints, and check your architecture before the hardware phase begins.
Are you really saving time by skipping the one stage that helps finalize the spec and address high‑risk areas early on?
👁️🗨️ Is there anything we've missed?
A special line for tags:
