> Like what they have some superior knowledge or ability to design ?
No, but they have the scale where that level of specialty makes sense. McDonald's has food chemists on staff, but the local burger joint does not.
> what if we said lets stop innovating before apple or any of these became a thing
It's important for any organization to know what its competitive advantage is and where to spend its innovation tokens. D.R. Horton is the number one homebuilder in the United States, but they don't make their own light switches.
> No, but they have the scale where that level of specialty makes sense. McDonald's has food chemists on staff, but the local burger joint does not.
Now they do, they didnt always, you have to start from somewhere, you always start small you dont just become a huge company instantly. Also wtf kind of an analogy is that ? Oh yeah chemists never innovate on your own or at a small scale we have big corpos doing it so you guys can stop now thanks
I think you have heard the rather famous quote "Its better to be a pirate than join the navy", small scale stuff can move a lot lot faster than some huge conglomerate.
I agree that not everyone needs to roll their own design but i think your conclusion is rather idiotic.
>AI Phone where everything is done / seen on the lock screen (AI generates the visuals as you text or talk to it) and or its more of a text and voice digital experience less UI.
I think more expressive UIs are the future but i disagree with this sort of thing being accomplished with a non deterministic tool such as AI generating UIs, you are throwing stability and consistency along with familiarity out the window.
The idea of tools being almost UI-less and composable and modular has been a "dream" since xerox parc or see for example the book "the humane interface" which happens to also ahead of its time outline reasons why such generative interfaces would be a bad idea especially at such a large scale.
AI can potentially relieve some friction with that paradigm but definitely not in that way or even that extent.
When you aim for familiarity you also make the assumption that someone else's judgement and opinion was and is the correct one, when you question the assumed only then can you make meaningful improvements. See the iphone which was totally different to the "standard" phones of its time.
Because the people making purchasing decisions for SAP and Salesforce are not people who spend any substantial share of their time using it directly or care about the UX.
There have been but the strength isnt in the ux. Both are effectively enterprise ruby on rails where you can customize and integrate with anything. That is also why they are sticky. They become part of core business pipelines. It is hilarious because the performance is terrible too.
not only possible but sometimes necessary because sometimes you need to sacrifice familiarity and question the assumptions we have to truly make meaningful improvements
a product can be a piece of art and design can and does in practice often go hand in had with art, practically most designers also other than the utilitarian role practice the artistic one, wether you would want to group art within design as one is a matter of definitions
Like what they have some superior knowledge or ability to design ?
Let me remind you they weren't always tech giants, what if we said lets stop innovating before apple or any of these became a thing.