How could the majority of people collect a salary working on software that has no users? That makes no sense.
I’m not intending to generalize, quite the opposite. I’m arguing against a generalization that “speed is the killer feature [for all products]”. In my post I presented a few cases where this over-generalization is not true (pre-PMF startup and potentially large B2B product) and suggested a more nuanced and objective analysis of the trade-offs.
> You are speaking in generalities, so you are essentially implying that most people are working on software that has not achieved product market fit?
Perhaps try parsing my post as “here are a few examples of common cases where speed is not the killer feature, and a sketch of a more flexible thought process that will get you to a better answer”.
Product managers at both large and small companies use ROI and experimentation to figure out what to build (though in some ways it’s actually harder at a startup as your sample size can be too small to get statistical significance, or at least to run as many experiments as you’d like).
Basically, if you think that software is feast-or-famine as an investment, then this would make sense.