Just fill needs that you have. Don't like how something existing works? Fix it. Think you can offer a better version of an existing idea? Go for it.
Also: ideas are far less important than execution [1]. That's why it's best to work on problems you actually care about. If you don't, you'll end up cutting corners or burning out well in advance of success.
> Just fill needs that you have. Don't like how something existing works? Fix it. Think you can offer a better version of an existing idea? Go for it.
While I don't disagree with this point, what it often leads to is developers creating developer tools, which is a crowded and competitive area.
There are fields out there that are crying out for tech solutions because they are lumbering dinosaurs that haven't changed with the times. One example is the maritime industry. It's amazing how much is still done with pen and paper on a ship. True, there is often a reluctance to adopt new tech, but the younger cohort of mariners are far more eager and receptive to tech solutions than the previous generation.
My suggestion is to look for those industries and talk to folks in those fields about their pain points. The bar may be so low that you could step over it.
> While I don't disagree with this point, what it often leads to is developers creating developer tools, which is a crowded and competitive area.
That can certainly happen. But you should at least have some domain experience or have a partner who does. Otherwise, not only will it be hard to come to the correct solution, you'll struggle to get your foot in the door to the industry.
Agreed: you don't want to create a solution to a hypothesized problem that doesn't actually exist. My point is that there are low hanging fruit if you step outside your immediate bubble, but — as you say — you'll need a guide.
I agree with the first half, but strongly disagree with the second half of what you wrote. Ideas matter immensely. If you work on the wrong thing, perfect execution is not going to get you anywhere. If you work on the right thing, then even with mediocre execution will bring you at least some success.
The best idea in the world without execution: worth zero.
A very simple idea (say, a hamburguer stand) but executed well is worth a lot.
Then you have everything in between.
Like you say, even a mediocre execution on a great idea can be worth something - which is often the case of business software. You do run the risk of a competitor out-executing you, and the risk is greater the worse the execution was.
One man’s idea is another man’s execution. It’s a useless phrase, in my experience, because there is nothing that determines the difference. For instance, was git a novel idea of applied distributed merkle trees or simply the existing idea of version control executed better? I see it as primarily a matter of ideas, but to someone else, maybe not?
> If you work on the wrong thing, perfect execution is not going to get you anywhere. If you work on the right thing, then even with mediocre execution will bring you at least some success.
You're not wrong but that should be self-evident. Most people know when they have a bad idea, they just lack the humility to admit it.
This is great advice. Ideas are at best a head start, Execution is everything. Solve a problem you know thoroughly. Solve a problem you have yourself. You can pivot later but even if it goes nowhere, you solved something you can use even if no one else does.
Also: ideas are far less important than execution [1]. That's why it's best to work on problems you actually care about. If you don't, you'll end up cutting corners or burning out well in advance of success.
[1] https://sive.rs/multiply