Your 10-minute MVP isn't the flex you think it is!
People really need to stop with the "I cloned this app in under 10 minutes..." posts for one-off prototypes built with AI tools such as Bolt and Cursor. Posts like these are problematic because of several reasons:
For one, they ignore the iterative nature of good product design. Design is built on cycles of ideation, prototyping, and testing. You can't build a "finished" product in 10 or 30 minutes. When you rush to build something in 30 minutes, you're implicitly saying "I already know exactly what needs to be built" - which goes against everything about successful product design.
Secondly, they focus on implementation speed rather than problem-solution fit - which is arguably the most damaging aspect of the "speed build" mindset. The goal of an MVP isn't to build something quickly - it's about having the right features that validate or invalidate your core hypotheses about the product. What's the point of speed if you're building the wrong thing?
This reminds of the "dribbblization" of design - where the focus shifted from substantive problem-solving to surface-level aesthetics and impractical perfect design shots, while optimizing for virality. Yes, they will get lots of likes, but it fundamentally misses the point of what we're trying to achieve as product designers.
Here's what you should be doing instead – the essential pre-work, and that means:
- Deep problem definition and validation
- Conducting user interviews and research
- Capturing insights
- Mapping the problem space thoroughly
- Clearly outlining the hypothesis you wish to test
Only AFTER this groundwork should you bring in these rapid build tools. Then you can use them to:
Explore different directions to help visualize your options before committing to a cloned design.
Create functional prototypes to test specific flows and interactions where Figma falls flat.
Create proof-of-concepts to validate technical approaches with XFN. Show, rather than tell for what's possible.
When you clone an existing app, you're essentially taking a snapshot without understanding:
The context that led to those specific design decisions
Why certain features were prioritized over others
All the failed experiments and iterations they went through
What technical constraints shaped the solution
Whether what you're cloning is actually an A/B test that might fail
If those features are about to be deprecated
Whether that design pattern is actually performing well
It's like copying someone's answer without understanding their problem-solving process – and worse, not even knowing if that answer is correct! So, use these tools for all I care – heck, I use them everyday, but please, do so mindfully – and stop pretending you have discovered the holy grail of product design after cloning an app that took years of research, ideation, and validation to get right.