PostHog, a product analytics company, shares 50 lessons learned from building their own product. Key takeaways emphasize user feedback as paramount, from early access programs to continuous iteration based on observed behavior and direct conversations. A strong focus on solving specific, urgent problems for a well-defined target audience is crucial. Iterative development, rapid prototyping, and a willingness to abandon unsuccessful features are essential. Finally, internal alignment, clear communication, and a shared understanding of the product vision contribute significantly to success. They stress the importance of simplicity and usability, avoiding feature bloat, and consistently measuring the impact of changes.
Kasey Hou designed and built a repairable, flatpack toaster using readily available components and off-the-shelf heating elements. The toaster's simple, modular design prioritizes ease of repair and disassembly. It features easily replaceable parts, accessible screws, and a clear labeling system. Hou's goal was to challenge the planned obsolescence prevalent in many consumer electronics by creating a toaster built to last and be easily fixed, reducing electronic waste. The project showcases a practical application of design for repairability and serves as an example of how product longevity can be intentionally designed into everyday appliances.
Commenters on Hacker News largely praised the repairable flatpack toaster project for its focus on right-to-repair and sustainability. Several expressed interest in purchasing such a product, highlighting the desire for longer-lasting appliances. Some discussed the potential challenges of sourcing parts and the complexities of achieving true repairability, while others debated the practicality of flatpacking a toaster versus other appliances. A few commenters also pointed out the existing availability of repairable toasters, suggesting the novelty lies primarily in the flatpack design and open-source nature of this project. There was some skepticism about the toaster's aesthetic appeal and the added assembly burden for consumers.
The post "UI is hell: four-function calculators" explores the surprising complexity and inconsistency in the seemingly simple world of four-function calculator design. It highlights how different models handle order of operations (especially chained calculations), leading to varied and sometimes unexpected results for identical input sequences. The author showcases these discrepancies through numerous examples and emphasizes the challenge of creating an intuitive and predictable user experience, even for such a basic tool. Ultimately, the piece demonstrates that seemingly minor design choices can significantly impact functionality and user understanding, revealing the subtle difficulties inherent in user interface design.
HN commenters largely agreed with the author's premise that UI design is difficult, even for seemingly simple things like calculators. Several shared anecdotes of frustrating calculator experiences, particularly with cheap or poorly designed models exhibiting unexpected behavior due to button order or illogical function implementation. Some discussed the complexities of parsing expressions and the challenges of balancing simplicity with functionality. A few commenters highlighted the RPN (Reverse Polish Notation) input method as a superior alternative, albeit with a steeper learning curve. Others pointed out the differences between physical and software calculator design constraints. The most compelling comments centered around the surprising depth of complexity hidden within the design of a seemingly mundane tool and the difficulties in creating a truly intuitive user experience.
Summary of Comments ( 7 )
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43267095
Hacker News users generally praised the PostHog article for its practical, experience-based advice applicable to various stages of product development. Several commenters highlighted the importance of focusing on user needs and iterating based on feedback, echoing points made in the original article. Some appreciated the emphasis on internal communication and alignment within teams. A few users offered specific examples from their own experiences that reinforced the lessons shared by PostHog, while others offered constructive criticism, suggesting additional areas for consideration, such as the importance of distribution and marketing. The discussion also touched on the nuances of pricing strategies and the challenges of transitioning from a founder-led sales process to a more scalable approach.
The Hacker News post titled "Things we've learned about building successful products" (linking to a PostHog newsletter article) generated a moderate amount of discussion, with a handful of comments focusing on specific points from the article and offering further insights or alternative perspectives.
Several commenters appreciated the practical, experience-based nature of PostHog's learnings. One commenter highlighted the value of the list's emphasis on focusing on user needs and iterating quickly, praising the advice to "Ship, talk, iterate" as fundamental. They expanded on this, stating that constant communication with users is crucial for understanding their true needs and ensuring the product's relevance.
Another commenter zeroed in on the importance of niching down initially, as advocated in the article. They agreed with this strategy, explaining that starting with a specific, well-defined target audience allows for a deeper understanding of their needs and facilitates faster product-market fit. They also cautioned against prematurely broadening the target market, emphasizing that focusing on a niche allows for more efficient resource allocation and a stronger initial foothold.
The discussion also touched upon the challenge of balancing short-term wins with long-term vision. One commenter pointed out the inherent tension between delivering immediate value to users and building a sustainable, long-term roadmap. They suggested that while quick wins are essential for maintaining momentum and demonstrating progress, it's crucial to align them with the overall strategic direction of the product.
One commenter provided a contrasting perspective on the advice about saying "no" more often. While acknowledging the importance of focus, they argued that early-stage companies should be more open to exploring different opportunities. They suggested that saying "yes" more often in the beginning can lead to unexpected discoveries and potentially uncover valuable new directions.
Finally, some commenters engaged in a brief discussion about the effectiveness of different product development methodologies. One commenter mentioned their positive experience with the Shape Up methodology, while another questioned its suitability for all types of projects. This exchange highlighted the ongoing debate around choosing the right development process and the importance of adapting methodologies to specific team structures and project needs.
Overall, the comments on the Hacker News post reflect a general appreciation for the practical advice offered in the PostHog article. The discussion provides further nuance and context to the original points, offering valuable insights from various perspectives on product development challenges and best practices.