Why launching even a tiny product is better than months of theory
Earlier this month I launched a small Chrome extension on Product Hunt. It wasn’t about winning “Product of the Day” — I wanted to see how much you can actually learn by shipping a micro product fast. And honestly, the process taught me more than months of reading theory.
Idea
Most Chrome extensions in the store look unpolished. I wanted to try the opposite: something tiny but well-designed and packaged.
Design & presentation
Even for a micro product, clean UI, clear screenshots, and a short video changed how “real” it felt.
Launch
On launch day there were 331 products. Snappi ended up #46, fully organic, no budget, no push agencies.
Takeaways
Shipping a micro product gives you real practice in packaging, launch dynamics, and honest feedback — skills that are hard to get from theory alone.
Question
Has anyone here tried launching a “micro product” just for the learning experience? Did it help when you shipped something bigger later?
I wrote a longer breakdown with more details on Medium in case anyone wants to dive deeper: https://medium.com/@saverchenko/what-i-learned-from-launching-a-micro-product-on-product-hunt-4dfdcc49f3c7
Really like this approach, shipping small but polished is underrated. Micro launches seem like a great way to build launch muscle before tackling bigger products.
Exactly - micro launches are like practice reps. You build confidence and learn the small details that matter, so when it’s time for a bigger launch you’re not starting from zero.
Thanks for sharing. It's really encouraging to read as I’m trying to build something small myself, mainly to learn the process end to end.
Beyond the polished screenshots and promo video (which looked great), what do you think made the biggest difference in the launch? For example, did your posts on X or LinkedIn contribute meaningfully, even with limited reach?
Also, roughly how did your time split between building, admin, and promotion?
Screenshots, the promo video, and a clear product description definitely mattered a lot. But I should emphasize - I’m not positioning myself as some big expert who built a huge product and now hands out advice 🙂. My goal with this launch was very specific (I explained it in more detail in the Medium post). As for promotion, my posts on X and LinkedIn didn’t bring any noticeable results, but that can vary. If you already have an audience, or if the algorithm happens to push your post, it can definitely make a difference.
I read the Snappy story on medium. I'm impressed by the approach and attention to detail. The result is a product that is enjoyable to have (even if it's not necessary). I'm curious about your opinion on promoting a CLI utility. In this field, there are no such opportunities for visual representation of the product. They all look the same.
That’s a great question - promoting CLI tools is definitely harder since you don’t have the same visual layer to “sell” the experience. I’d focus less on screenshots and more on storytelling around use cases: short demos in the terminal, gifs showing commands in action, and especially content that highlights the before/after (e.g. how much time or pain it saves). In a way, the community aspect matters even more for CLI - devs trust other devs, so tutorials, open-source repos, and word of mouth often carry more weight than visuals.
Thank you for your response. I have come to the same conclusions. The github repository with a detailed description is ready, and the gifs have been mounted. In the near future, I plan to launch a small company on secondary target platforms to test the audience before the main launch.
Sounds like you’re on a solid track - best of luck with the launch and testing, curious to see how it turns out!
Have a monetisation plan for your free Chrome extension?
For this extension I didn’t plan monetization the whole point was to run a micro experiment and practice the full cycle from idea to launch. I broke down the reasoning in more detail in my Medium post.
Totally agree. Shipping something small exposes the real constraints fast (distribution, onboarding, pricing) that “theory mode” hides. Curious: when you say “tiny,” how do you scope it—1 core outcome, 1 persona, 1 channel? Also, what’s your single success metric for week 1 (e.g., 10 signups, 3 activations)? I’m a full-stack dev and I’ve found picking one activation event keeps me from overbuilding.
Good point about scoping - I kept Snappi as small as possible: one clear outcome, make switching search engines feel instant and polished. For week 1 I didn’t set personas or growth targets, just wanted to see if people would install it and try it at least once. Anything beyond that felt like overkill for a micro experiment.
That’s a smart way to frame it — one polished outcome, zero overthinking. Out of curiosity, once you saw people installing and trying it, did you track what they did next (e.g., repeat usage, uninstalls)? I’ve noticed those “second touch” signals often show whether it’s a sticky idea or just a curiosity click.
I didn’t track deeper retention metrics this time, since the focus was on the launch process itself. For a micro experiment it was enough to see installs and first use, but I agree those “second touch” signals are the real test if it’s sticky or just curiosity.
Makes sense — that early validation loop is underrated. As a dev/founder, I’ve started treating those “first-touch” launches almost like calibration rounds — see what breaks, then double down only if the 2nd-touch metrics (return use, re-installs, shares) show life.
Absolutely, that’s a great mindset - treating early launches as calibration rounds helps you learn faster without overcommitting.
Calibrating early is the only way to build momentum without burning cycles on “perfect” ideas.
Exactly - it’s all about keeping momentum while staying flexible enough to learn along the way.
This comment was deleted 18 days ago.