2026-01-19 18:38:15

The usability design of a product can truly determine life or death.

Yesterday, I was chatting with a senior executive from a traditional enterprise. This guy has forward-thinking ideas and started researching AI as early as 2023, full of curiosity about new technologies. But interestingly, when we discussed specific applications, he was discouraged by the initial technical details—whether it was network configuration, terminal tools, or various environmental management tools, these seemingly basic things are a barrier for users without a technical background.

This makes us realize a question: how many good products die at the moment of installation and startup?

Coincidentally, I recently saw a company release a new version of their tool that directly simplifies these upfront obstacles. The same functional logic, but the user experience is completely different—from previously having to tinker with various configurations to being ready to use immediately. I recommended this solution to the executive, and the feedback was immediately different.

What does this case illustrate? In the current highly competitive landscape of Web3 and AI tools, the real difference isn’t in the features themselves, but in whether you truly understand the user pain points. Lowering the entry barrier is key to turning a niche tool into a mass-market application.

View Original

This page may contain third-party content, which is provided for information purposes only (not representations/warranties) and should not be considered as an endorsement of its views by Gate, nor as financial or professional advice. See Disclaimer for details.

7 Likes

Reward
7
4
Repost
Share

Comment

0/400

ThesisInvestor

· 18h ago

Honestly, that's why products from big companies can still outperform niche tools... Low barriers to entry are an absolute advantage. I think this is especially obvious in Web3. No matter how brilliant the protocol architecture design is, ordinary users will give up if they can't even set up a wallet properly. Things like plug-and-play are often worth more than being three generations ahead in technical specifications.

View OriginalReply0

AirdropHunter007

· 18h ago

That's why so many Web3 projects ultimately become tech geeks' self-indulgence... Basically, they are unwilling to improve the user experience. One-click startup truly outperforms ninety-nine layers of feature stacking, I believe it. Configuration hell discourages many potential users; it's time to reflect. The reaction of that traditional company guy represents the market—high barriers = fewer users, it's that simple. "Plug and play" sounds easy to say but hard to implement, yet it is indeed a key differentiator. UX design might be more important than algorithms; this should be especially heeded in Web3.

View OriginalReply0

SandwichHunter

· 18h ago

Really, the setup barrier is the number one killer. Many good things die at the "cannot install" step. --- The point of "plug and play" hits the mark. Those old tools were just troublemakers; who has that much free time? --- To put it simply, it's still about not treating users like fools. Simplifying the process is the real skill. --- I feel this is the difference between Web3 and traditional software—one is painfully difficult. --- Even executives have been persuaded to leave, so you can imagine how desperate ordinary users are... This is truly not a small issue. --- That's why some projects can't get off the ground; it's not that the product isn't good, but that users can't get in. --- The life and death of any tool hinge on the first three steps. Only after passing this hurdle can there be a follow-up.

View OriginalReply0

BlockchainFries

· 18h ago

Exactly right, that's why so many awesome products ultimately fail due to UX issues. Really, no matter how powerful the features are, users can't even install them. This is the real problem Web3 needs to solve—the barrier to entry is too high. Ease of installation and use is the key; now competition depends on this.

View OriginalReply0