Caught Between Clicks and Chat: The Tug-of-War Over UX’s Future

What if traditional UX and chat-based interfaces aren’t the way forward at all? What if automation tools like "H," with their $220M pre-seed and the promise of clicking everything on your desktop for you, aren’t the future?

Here’s the twist: what if the real answer is creating UX on the fly—something entirely new, rendered in real time based on what you need?

Starting with Windows 3.1, UX has been built around one simple principle: teach the user how to use the system. Dropdowns, menus, buttons—it’s a framework we all know. Now, conversational UI arrives overnight offering something radically different: a system that learns you.

The champions of conversational UI claim this is the future. It’s faster, easier, and more human. Why dig through a settings menu when you can just say, “Set my alarm for 6 a.m.”?

Critics, however, have their doubts. Conversational systems work great when they’re simple, but when they fail, users immediately fall back to what’s familiar—dropdowns, buttons, and structured workflows. This creates a dilemma for companies trying to move forward without losing their users in the process.

Big Companies vs. Startups: Who Has the Edge?

Big companies are stuck between two worlds. On one side, their legacy UX systems have a huge base of loyal users who trust them. On the other, startups with pure AI-driven solutions are gaining traction, offering seamless, modern experiences free from legacy baggage.

But even startups face limitations. Not every task can be solved by chat. Complex workflows still need structure—visual indicators, options to click, and workflows that make sense at a glance.

That’s why the current trend leans toward hybrids: chatbots layered on top of traditional interfaces, giving users the choice between typing and tapping. It’s a stopgap measure, one that solves some problems but creates others. Hybrid systems can be clunky, expensive to maintain, and frustrating for users who don’t want to switch modes constantly.

Here’s My Two Cents

What if the future of UX doesn’t belong to either of these camps? What if we stop layering solutions and start creating them on the fly?

Imagine this: instead of navigating menus or typing commands, the system dynamically generates the perfect interface for your exact needs. Need detailed analytics? A dashboard appears. Want a simple task done? A single button or natural language option is ready for you.

It’s not about automation like "H," where a bot clicks through every conceivable option—it’s about creating an entirely new interface tailored to you.

The Real Challenge: Adapting to the User

This isn’t just a technical leap; it’s a mindset shift. The real winners in UX won’t be the companies that stick to traditional interfaces or bet everything on chat. It’ll be the ones that build systems capable of adapting, evolving, and delivering what users need moment by moment.

So, what do you think? Are we on the brink of conversational dominance, or could this idea of on-the-fly UX change the game completely?