Quality and Quantity is defferent,
Quality contributes to the result directly, while quantity are more about time spent, efficiency.
If you ask about which is better, I will say the best is a big team size with high quality.
Topic: Are Big Dev Teams Successful?? - page 2. (Read 577 times)
I remember hearing a radio host talking about ICOs and how there are some real jewels in all of these startup companies. He described how Apple started so small and how amazing it would have been to be given the ability to be a part of it at that time. That is what is amazing about ICOs, it gives everyone that ability.
Success all depends on the activeness of the dev but big teams are most likely to succeed
well, if you are idea is good you will do a good work, and other developers will join to you later if needed 
but big development teams are always better, because the coin world changes and they always should keep their product updated and better
but big development teams are always better, because the coin world changes and they always should keep their product updated and better
You have interesting view, I agree with you at all
What you say is true, can't argue with what you're saying is true, but I think the projects with big dev teams wouldn't want to admit it. good luck on your project. 
More important than team size is in these days financial background which often makes the difference in making a noise out of the crowd.
Small teams often do not have that.
Small teams often do not have that.
Again, that goes against nearly every successful start up story. Read the start up stories of FB, Twitter, Microsoft, Amazon, Virgin, ect, ect, ect. All were started by 1 or 2 people with a dream and grit to follow it through.
More important than team size is in these days financial background which often makes the difference in making a noise out of the crowd.
Small teams often do not have that.
Small teams often do not have that.
I agree with you. well-known devs actually got their best idea done and don't have enthusiasm a new face has.
The answer to your question is Yes, big teams Dev are successful but the success depends on the individual efforts and synergy between each member.
Also, what the project is about is another big determining factor in the success of the team. The project needs to really provide a solution to a problem, not just copy and do slight modification of existing technologies and still offer zero solution.
Also, what the project is about is another big determining factor in the success of the team. The project needs to really provide a solution to a problem, not just copy and do slight modification of existing technologies and still offer zero solution.
Yes there are some successes but big dev teams goes against the statistics of successful start ups/ companies.
The answer to your question is Yes, big teams Dev are successful but the success depends on the individual efforts and synergy between each member.
Also, what the project is about is another big determining factor in the success of the team. The project needs to really provide a solution to a problem, not just copy and do slight modification of existing technologies and still offer zero solution.
Also, what the project is about is another big determining factor in the success of the team. The project needs to really provide a solution to a problem, not just copy and do slight modification of existing technologies and still offer zero solution.
you have to be consitently on it, big teams will dissolve themselves with internal arguments if there is no leader in it.
currently many headless big teams like ripple are basically just fullfilling orders like a bunch of zeolots, if they would be out of money they wouldt be able to do anything
they are furthermore extremly uneffective. which is also a sight for short term durability.
regards
currently many headless big teams like ripple are basically just fullfilling orders like a bunch of zeolots, if they would be out of money they wouldt be able to do anything
they are furthermore extremly uneffective. which is also a sight for short term durability.
regards
Big clap for your comment. I totally agree. Look at the Tezos fiasco.
It's not above how many dev's or how large is the team. The success is always depends on their idea, their effort and how are their motivated to success. Large team is nothing to the small team but with big courage.
How big the team or how many the members doesn't give a lot of the successful of the project itself, And i told you about gbyte token which already choose the airdrop method to be the way to distribute the token and that project already started just with a person.
Exactly. If you look at all the big corporations, not just tech, most were started by 1 person.
you have to be consitently on it, big teams will dissolve themselves with internal arguments if there is no leader in it.
currently many headless big teams like ripple are basically just fullfilling orders like a bunch of zeolots, if they would be out of money they wouldt be able to do anything
they are furthermore extremly uneffective. which is also a sight for short term durability.
regards
currently many headless big teams like ripple are basically just fullfilling orders like a bunch of zeolots, if they would be out of money they wouldt be able to do anything
they are furthermore extremly uneffective. which is also a sight for short term durability.
regards
How big the team or how many the members doesn't give a lot of the successful of the project itself, And i told you about gbyte token which already choose the airdrop method to be the way to distribute the token and that project already started just with a person.
This is a really good point! Thanks for sharing.
Ok, I will start by stating that we are a 4 person dev/start up team. And compared to the 20+ people in other start up teams competing for ICO money, we might look, well, small. Not too mention all the fancy big names that are on as advisors for the project. I get it, they want to look like they got it all together and are already successful.
But then I think of all the biggest tech corporations all started by 1 or 2 people in their garage or basement or dorm room. I don’t think one of them started with more than 3 people and they surely didn't have a big group of big name advisors backing them. Most entrepreneurs have to fight their way to the top against all odds with people telling them their idea is stupid or crazy or unworkable. Yet they proved them all wrong and that made them strong enough to go on to be in the 10% whose businesses succeed.
They all started with 1 or 2 people with a dream to make something valuable, and I realize we are in good company. That’s us, just like them starting with a dream and a drive to make that dream happen through problem solving, a can do attitude, and a will to not give up no matter what. Yes our little team is in good company.
https://www.moneytree.social/
But then I think of all the biggest tech corporations all started by 1 or 2 people in their garage or basement or dorm room. I don’t think one of them started with more than 3 people and they surely didn't have a big group of big name advisors backing them. Most entrepreneurs have to fight their way to the top against all odds with people telling them their idea is stupid or crazy or unworkable. Yet they proved them all wrong and that made them strong enough to go on to be in the 10% whose businesses succeed.
They all started with 1 or 2 people with a dream to make something valuable, and I realize we are in good company. That’s us, just like them starting with a dream and a drive to make that dream happen through problem solving, a can do attitude, and a will to not give up no matter what. Yes our little team is in good company.
https://www.moneytree.social/
If your idea is ground breaking everything will come great in the end. It does not matter in the beginning whether you have 4 people or 100 people working if you can't deliver a product in the end in both examples you will fail.
Ok, I will start by stating that we are a 4 person dev/start up team. And compared to the 20+ people in other start up teams competing for ICO money, we might look, well, small. Not too mention all the fancy big names that are on as advisors for the project. I get it, they want to look like they got it all together and are already successful.
But then I think of all the biggest tech corporations all started by 1 or 2 people in their garage or basement or dorm room. I don’t think one of them started with more than 3 people and they surely didn't have a big group of big name advisors backing them. Most entrepreneurs have to fight their way to the top against all odds and that made them strong enough to go on to be in the 10% whose businesses succeed.
They all started with 1 or 2 people with a dream to make something valuable, and I realize we are in good company. That’s us, just like them starting with a dream and a drive to make that dream happen through problem solving, a can do attitude, and a will to not give up no matter what. Yes our little team is in good company.
https://www.moneytree.social/
But then I think of all the biggest tech corporations all started by 1 or 2 people in their garage or basement or dorm room. I don’t think one of them started with more than 3 people and they surely didn't have a big group of big name advisors backing them. Most entrepreneurs have to fight their way to the top against all odds and that made them strong enough to go on to be in the 10% whose businesses succeed.
They all started with 1 or 2 people with a dream to make something valuable, and I realize we are in good company. That’s us, just like them starting with a dream and a drive to make that dream happen through problem solving, a can do attitude, and a will to not give up no matter what. Yes our little team is in good company.
https://www.moneytree.social/
Jump to: