Minimal Viable Product is old and busted

Re:Minimal Viable Product is old and busted by TacoSteemers on Monday March 14, 2022 @04:52AM (#30669960)

For large organisations the amount of entries in the dropdown is probably very large. To fill the dropdown would then require significant work on the server, and to build up and show the dropdown would require significant work on the client.

Edit, of course a proper solution would be well-thought out and would not crash, but that solution would also not be using a single dropdown to show all possible values because that is not usable when it is more than 20 entries.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Minimal Viable Product is old and busted by rmbyrro on Monday March 14, 2022 @10:06AM (#30672603)

Modern backends and frontends can surely handle way more than 20 entries in a dropdown without sweating.

But in case you do have a LOT of entries that modern hardware cannot handle efficiently, just switch to a selector based on a search box (perhaps with autocomplete), instead of a dropdown.

Since it's an easy modification in the UI, perhaps these startups used a dropdown for simplicity, knowing they can change to a selector search box quickly, if it becomes an issue.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Minimal Viable Product is old and busted by TacoSteemers on Monday March 14, 2022 @11:02AM (#30673252)

> Modern backends and frontends can surely handle way more than 20 entries in a dropdown without sweating.

I agree. I meant that I as a user will not find it usable enough if I often have to search the correct value in lists of 20 or more.

The discussion of the load on the frontend and backend was about amounts large enough to create problems if the developer wrote naive code, but we did not get in to a specific amount.

[ Parent | on HN ]