> Figma could build an illustrator killer in 6 months if they wanted to and it would be obliterated
Statements like this are almost always wrong, if for no other reason that a technically superior alternative is rarely compelling enough by itself. It that weren’t the case you would see it happen far more often…
That’s a different scenario: could a system be built to eat X’s lunch.
The scenario I was calling out is more: Company A is great at X, so clearly that technology could be used to easily be great at Y, and doom company B in 6 months. The problem with that thinking is that often the technology is the easy part (and sometimes superficial similarity, also).
Statements like this are almost always wrong, if for no other reason that a technically superior alternative is rarely compelling enough by itself. It that weren’t the case you would see it happen far more often…