2026-01-15 20:55:40

Many teams' AI strategies have fallen into a trap—when launching new features, they habitually force AI assistants into the product without fundamentally reconstructing from an AI-native product mindset. The result is that the features seem comprehensive on the surface, but the actual experience is disappointing.

What’s even more painful is that many products, despite implementing a large number of AI features, have terrible execution details. They appear to have learned about 80% of their competitors’ approaches, but in practice, they are worlds apart. Take AI chat functions, for example—some top-tier products’ conversation experiences still can't match the standards of certain specialized tools.

The most telling detail is—some products still retain that uncomfortable background color scheme, and haven't changed it at all. What does this indicate? The product team itself doesn’t use these features in their daily work. Only those who use them every day can truly feel the user frustrations caused by these details. This is a typical sign of a disconnect between product thinking and execution.

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.

17 Likes

Reward
17
6
Repost
Share

Comment

0/400

pumpamentalist

· 14h ago

Exactly right, this is a classic "functionality trap." Seeing a long list of features, but as soon as you use it, you realize it's just for show. The real problem is this—if the team doesn't even use it themselves, how can they possibly craft a good experience?

View OriginalReply0

PaperHandSister

· 14h ago

Really hits the sore spot, a bunch of product managers don't even use their own products To put it plainly, it's just for the sake of passing the check-in, with endless AI feature stacking That bizarre color scheme bothers me every day, and I have nothing to say about products that don't even bother to make a change

View OriginalReply0

ContractHunter

· 14h ago

It's really just a matter of skin deep changes; the product manager doesn't even use it themselves, yet they still have the nerve to say it's highly complete? --- This is a typical case of "feature bloat"; adding an AI shell is all it takes? --- The color scheme is so ugly and hasn't been changed. What does that say? It means no one is really using what they made. --- Looking at some big companies' AI features, they are not even as smooth as small specialized tools. That's awkward. --- I hate this kind of forced integration. AI isn't something you can just stuff in; it needs a fundamental rearchitecture. --- Features that even the product team doesn't use daily? No wonder users aren't comfortable. --- Learning 80% of competitors' features but using them in two different worlds—it's hilarious. Details really do expose everything. --- The core reason for the AI strategy's failure is that the team doesn't see themselves as users. --- I've seen that color scheme before; it's truly torturous. Not changing it—what does that say? The person in charge probably already switched jobs, haha. --- Having full features doesn't equal good experience. Why do so many people not understand this?

View OriginalReply0

FancyResearchLab

· 15h ago

This is a typical Luban No.7 construction site—functionality piled up but no one actually lives or uses it. It's that kind of AI strategy that should theoretically work, but in reality, everyone hates it to death. Has the color scheme background not been changed yet? It shows that the product manager doesn't even take this thing seriously; it's purely a KPI machine. Teams that truly understand have long since completely rebuilt it. These are just digging pits for themselves to jump into.

View OriginalReply0

DefiPlaybook

· 15h ago

It's just like some protocols launching new features—merely changing contract parameters, but the user experience remains the same old way. True product thinking starts from zero, not just sticking plasters. The difference between a team that uses its own product daily and the Run approach is so big; it's all about human nature in the details. Some top projects can't even beat small tools—what does that say? Either it's a mindset issue or they just don't care. They don't fix user-hostile details like color schemes, which probably means the team hasn't even used their own production environment. It's like the difference between founders holding their own project tokens and those just wanting to quickly cash out. It feels like many products nowadays are playing the "stacking features" game, not realizing they're just increasing gas fees in their smart contracts.

View OriginalReply0