The article is, on its face, completely wrong.
> This last 1% [is] what separates a product that might not eventually fail from one that will eventually fail.
Then proceeds to list a dozen different types of instrumentation, dashboards, and documentation.
I don't know about anyone else here but I've working on many, many successful software projects that have made their owners many millions of dollars with out-of-date or missing documentation, minimal instrumentation, and minimal or no dashboards to speak of. Most projects I've worked on have achieved at least some level of commercial success and the vast majority missed at least one of those major categories, usually several.
Yes you'll be in a much better place if you have it, but if your competitors and building features and iterating the product while you're building out instrumentation and dashboards, you're likely going to lose over time.
> This last 1% [is] what separates a product that might not eventually fail from one that will eventually fail.
Then proceeds to list a dozen different types of instrumentation, dashboards, and documentation.
I don't know about anyone else here but I've working on many, many successful software projects that have made their owners many millions of dollars with out-of-date or missing documentation, minimal instrumentation, and minimal or no dashboards to speak of. Most projects I've worked on have achieved at least some level of commercial success and the vast majority missed at least one of those major categories, usually several.
Yes you'll be in a much better place if you have it, but if your competitors and building features and iterating the product while you're building out instrumentation and dashboards, you're likely going to lose over time.