От халепа... Ця сторінка ще не має українського перекладу, але ми вже над цим працюємо!
От халепа... Ця сторінка ще не має українського перекладу, але ми вже над цим працюємо!


Andriy Tsebak
/
Co-Founder & BDM
10 min read
Every few years, the way new software products get started changes. In 2026 it changed faster than usual. Founders and product teams can now build a working prototype on their own with AI coding tools, and that has shifted what they expect from a development partner when it’s time to take an MVP to production.
By Andriy Tsebak, Co-Founder & BDM at NERDZ LAB

We see this from two sides. Our own projects at NERDZ LAB, together with the work of partner agencies we collaborate with, give us a steady flow of real cases to compare. Add regular conversations with founders, CTOs and partners in the EU, the UK and the US, and some patterns become hard to miss.
The main one: AI hasn’t removed the need for an experienced development team, but it has changed what people hire one for. Below are six shifts in client requests we see most often, with the typical request behind each one and the steps we take to deliver it.
In this article:
- TL;DR: 6 shifts in how new software projects start in 2026
- 1. From “build me an app” to “get my MVP to production”
- 2. “AI makes it fast”: where expertise still matters
- 3. AI in the process and AI in the product
- 4. “Will our data train someone’s model?” is now question one
- 5. Test tasks are turning into real work
- 6. Two buyers dominate: serial founders and SaaS-replacing businesses
- Checklist: what to prepare before you talk to a development partner
- FAQ
The most common first call now goes like this. A founder, or someone on the client’s team, has already built a version of the product with an AI tool such as Cursor, Lovable or Bolt. The demo works, and early users like it. The question is whether it can carry paying customers and their data without falling over.
Six months ago, a typical inbound request was a one-line idea: a travel app, an organizer, a marketplace. Today it’s more often a link to a working prototype and a list of what breaks. We also get more requests to rebuild existing platforms or finish projects another vendor left half done.
A prototype proves the idea. To take an MVP to production, a business needs more from it:
Typical request: “We have a working prototype built with AI tools, and users like it. Make it ready for real customers.”
How we approach it:
If you’re in the same spot, your prototype is the best brief you can give a team. It shows how the product should work far better than a 20-page spec. Expect a good team to review it before quoting and tell you plainly what to keep and what to rebuild. (Still at the idea stage? Our guide on how to build an MVP for a startup covers the earlier steps, and our MVP development for startups page explains how we run those projects.)
Many of these prototypes are an AI proof of concept (AI POC): a demo showing that AI can read documents, check inspections or write reports. Turning an AI POC into a product brings a few extra risks for the business.
| AI POC | Production AI product | |
|---|---|---|
| Quality of answers | Looks right in a demo | Checked on real data, with sources shown where users need proof |
| Running cost | Nobody looks at it | Known cost per use, with cheaper options where quality allows |
| Customer data | Sample files | Real data, with clear rules on which AI provider sees what |
| When AI gets it wrong | Rarely tested | A backup plan for when the AI is slow, wrong or unavailable |
Cost is often the first surprise. An AI service that was cheap during a demo can turn into a noticeable monthly bill once real customers use it, so part of the work is finding cheaper options without losing quality.
There’s a popular belief right now that AI makes development very fast and that a project no longer needs much involvement from experienced engineers. It’s easy to see where it comes from. If a working prototype took a few evenings to build, a full product sounds like a few more.
Part of it is true. Our teams use AI every day for routine coding, testing, documentation and first design drafts, and it does shorten timelines.
What AI speeds up most is writing code. The decisions that protect your investment still come from experienced people: how the system is built, how it connects to your other tools, how it handles security and unusual situations, and how it keeps working after launch. AI helps with each of these, and an expert decides what to keep and what to fix. That judgment is what stops a product from becoming expensive to change later.
Typical request: “Our current app was built fast, and now every new feature breaks something. We need a team that can make it stable and keep it that way.”
How we approach it:
When you talk to vendors, ask where AI saves you time and money in their process, and who checks its work. Our article on how we use AI across our development workflow shows where we draw that line.
Clients now expect AI to be part of how a team works. Many also ask for AI features in the product itself. These are two different things, and they work best together when each one has a clear job.
| AI in the process | AI in the product | |
|---|---|---|
| What it is | Tools the team uses to design, build and test your product | Features your customers use, such as reading documents or personal recommendations |
| What it gives you | Faster delivery and lower cost of routine work | New value for your customers |
| When it fits | On practically every project | When analysis shows AI solves a real customer problem better than a simpler solution |
| What to watch | Every piece of AI-generated work still gets checked | Accuracy, running cost and industry regulation |
AI in the process is part of the service we provide. It helps our team on every project, whether or not the product has a single AI feature. AI in the product starts with analysis: for any integration, we first check whether AI is really needed, and in several recent projects the best answer turned out to be a smaller one.
Typical request: “Add AI to our product.”
How we approach it:
So start with the user’s problem and check whether AI is the most reliable way to solve it. When it is, a team that already uses AI daily in its own work is well placed to build it into your product. Our AI development services page has more examples.

The first technical questions on a call used to be about tech stack and team size. Now they sound like this:
They’re fair questions. AI tools and plans differ a lot in how they treat your data, and an agency’s NDA means little if someone on the team pastes your codebase into a consumer chatbot.
Typical request: “Confirm in writing where our data will be hosted and who controls it.”
How we approach it:
Partner platforms check this too, with regular information security reviews of the teams they work with.
Ask for these answers in writing: which AI tools and plans, what the data retention terms are, where the servers are and who owns the cloud account. And check that your contract gives you the IP to all the code, however it was written.
Test tasks still matter, and in some ways they matter more now. Anyone can generate a decent-looking prototype, so a test task shows something else: how a team presents its solution, which options it considers and how it explains the trade-offs.
Typical request: “Before we sign, show us how you would solve one real problem from our project.”
How we approach it:
Selection overall has become more thorough, with milestone plans and effort estimates per role. Relevant experience weighs a lot: a team that has already delivered several similar projects often wins, and that is a fair reason.
If you’re choosing a team, give them a test task built from a real problem in your product, and ask each vendor for the case closest to yours. You’ll see how they think, and you keep the result either way.
Most new requests now come from two distinct groups of clients.
| Serial founder | Established business | |
|---|---|---|
| Goal | Test several ideas quickly, double down on the one that works | Fit software to its own processes |
| Starting point | Several AI-built prototypes | One or more SaaS subscriptions that fit only partly |
| Wants from a vendor | Speed, honest feedback, a path to production for the winner | Custom tools, integrations, long-term support |
| Typical first project | Prototype-to-production for one idea | Replace one subscription with an in-house tool |
The second group represents the more significant change. Custom software has become more affordable to build, and companies are reconsidering the traditional “buy, don’t build” approach. Paying monthly per-seat fees for an admin panel where only a fifth of the features are used is harder to justify when a custom solution, built around the company’s own processes, can turn out cheaper over a few years.
Typical request: “Replace the subscription tool our team uses every day with our own app.”
How we approach it:
Established businesses also plan further ahead. They often look for a partnership over several years, with a stable core team, in-house developers joining later, and clear terms for support and code handover from the very first conversation.
Before renewing a SaaS contract, it is worth listing which features are actually used and where the team works around limitations. If the gap is significant and the process is core to the business, owning the software may cost less over several years. For generic processes such as email or accounting, SaaS usually remains the better choice.
Often, yes, but rarely as-is. A development team usually keeps the flows and UI ideas, then improves or rebuilds the technical foundation: data, security and integrations. An audit of the prototype is the fastest way to know which parts can stay.
An AI POC proves that a model can do the task on sample data. A production AI product does it reliably on real data, at a known cost per use, with QA on its outputs, clear data handling and a fallback when the model fails.
It makes some parts faster, mainly routine features, testing and documentation. Architecture, integrations, QA and long-term support still take real engineering time, so expect savings, but smaller ones than the hype suggests. Our guide to app development costs in 2026 covers the build side in more detail.
Ask your vendor which AI tools they use, on which plans, and what the data-retention terms are. Put data handling and IP ownership in the contract, not only in the NDA.
Consider it when the tool is core to your operations, you pay for many unused features, and you work around its limits every day. Keep SaaS for generic functions where customization adds little value.
It depends on the product’s size and the response times you need. Many teams offer a fixed monthly package with a set number of hours and an SLA for critical issues. Ask for it together with the build estimate.
Send us the link to your prototype or AI POC. We review and audit it, then tell you plainly what can stay, what needs rebuilding, and what it will take to launch and support it. Book a call with NERDZ LAB