The real circular argument is "if only people used XXX they would love it!" That's not what I'm saying. People are choosing a new alternative to IRC because of the feature set.
Early on in the smartphone wars, the best argument from the Android side was "well just look at the adoption."
That isn't circular. Adoption is an important measure of "does this solve a problem people have?"
People rarely "vote with their feet", that's a myth used to justify a lot of crap that's happening in the world.
People follow the herd. In terms of collaboration tools, they use whatever tools everyone else uses, and often get stuck with bad solutions because of network effect. Just how many companies use Skype for group chats? In each case you could probably trace it back to the CEO / upper management needing it for actual video calls, who then force this tool on the employees and because it has some group chat capabilities, nobody bothers to switch to something better. I've seen similar things playing with other tools as well. It's not the good one that wins, it's the first good enough that does.
The real circular argument is "if only people used XXX they would love it!" That's not what I'm saying. People are choosing a new alternative to IRC because of the feature set.
Early on in the smartphone wars, the best argument from the Android side was "well just look at the adoption."
That isn't circular. Adoption is an important measure of "does this solve a problem people have?"