Imagine you are in a forest. It’s cold, 2AM, and there are wolves.

Now imagine you are in London during summer, 11AM, wanting to go for coffee leisurely.

In both situations, you need a car.

In the forest scenario, you need to escape ASAP because the problem is extreme.

In the London scenario, you need transportation but can wait until the problem gets solved.

If you present any car (even without wheels or windshield) to someone in the forest, they’d grab it instantly.

If you present that same car to someone in London, they would simply call a taxi and never get in.

These are two extremes that illustrate how we should think about UI/UX:

(A) If people willingly use an app with broken UI/UX, it indicates strong market demand. We should dig deeper, as UI/UX improvements could expand the market from “forest” to “city” users.

(B) If people are unwilling to use the app even in the “forest” scenario, something is fundamentally broken, and “city” users won’t adopt it either.

(C) If you spend too much time perfecting the UI/UX without first testing it in the “forest,” you may waste resources building toward scenario (B). However, there’s a chance to achieve scenario (A), though this possibility alone doesn’t mean you should pursue it.