I'd also add that if your project happens to be a "me-too" (which most projects probably are) then technical excellence might even be the deciding factor to establish and justify a presence in the marketplace.

I wonder why these advisory articles always assume that the common startup is built around some truly novel idea. In my expirience the opposite is true; 1% inspiration, 99% perspiration...

> technical excellence might even be the deciding factor to establish and justify a presence [for a "me-too" project] in the marketplace.

How often does technical excellence have a significant role in establishing presence in the marketplace? (I don't understand "justify". Justify to whom?)

I think you're thinking in terms of end-user products, like a website. In this case, technical excellence may be less relevant as long as it works. However, if you're selling technology, like in the example given at the end of article, technical excellence may carry a higher payoff. Another example: id software selling their engines to other game developers.

Justify to the users, give them a reason to use or switch to your product instead of staying with one of the competitors. (edit: a better word would maybe have been maintain)

I don't know how often it really plays a role but I think many google products fit this pattern. Search, Gmail, Docs and many others are not novel ideas - they were just better executed than what we had before.

One might even go on a limb and say that facebook is succeeding because it is a better myspace...

It's not an advisory article. It's just my approach. Somebody with a different background probably has a completely different approach.