I resonate so much with you. I'm in the middle of getting my product out for people to use and naively kept thinking that a good product means people are interested.

I need to integrate with tools that prematurely deny me because I'm not a big company. I basically already lost, despite my tool being much more reasonable and maintainable (I've worked at the competitors and it was a mess).

The world doesn't care about good products, they just care about how it looks. Big companies look good, you don't. It got me demotivated early on. You really need thick skin to start selling a product.

Your last paragraph is an interesting way to frame it.

I also think it's true; what appeals to people is something superficial. The product has to be highly optimized to generate an initial 'wow' factor. But it's almost impossible to create such 'wow' factor without sacrificing something fundamental about the product.

The goal is to make such a good first impression that people will pay for your product and then will keep convincing themselves and their friends that your product is great... When it's not because actually there are many better alternatives out there which are higher quality and provide more flexibility.

Among financially successful products, I see a lot of rigid, inflexible, low-quality products. They create a 'wow' factor by removing complexity; also removing flexibility... Targeting a specific psychological bias... These products seem 'easy' and magical at first but what makes them easy also makes them inflexible and fundamentally useless. Because flexibility is what gives a competitive edge... But flexibility also scares people away.

I have also fallen in this trap by thinking that a good product that addresses the needs of users would make it wanted. But coming so far with no traction to show I seriously doubt my prospects of bridging the gap between from the needs to the wants.