Ask HN: Has a better product failed due to lack of marketing?

So much of enterprise software is awful and successful because of "industry standard" brand recognition, platform integrations, and buckets of money to outspend upstarts.

Salesforce is a prime example, which until Lightning rolled out in earnest late 2017/early 2018, had UI and UX that killed productivity (and employee happiness). There were and still are tons of alternatives that are better to use, however, can't unseat the giant. Platform is a huge reason for this, however, is only one factor.

How about this?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Airbus_A220

Bombardier made a "clean sheet" plane (composite materials, geared turbofan, fly-by-wire, ...) that competes with the 1967-era 737. This plane would be cheaper to operate over the long term than the 737, be much quieter around the airport, use less fuel, generate less pollution, etc. Boeing offered a 70% discount to airlines to stay with the obsolete 737.

Long term passengers will suffer on a less comfortable plane and pay for increased operating costs with higher ticket prices.

In the end the plane got bought by Airbus because Airbus has the marketing power to not get bullied by Boeing.

This is the example that I conveniently use to say that marketing is important: https://www.kickstarter.com/discover/advanced?term=login&cat...

Most KS campaigns in the login/2fa space have failed. I let you evaluate the quality of the products, but I'm sure many of these would be valuable.

(Disclaimer: I was part of the first one, that succeeded. We didn't spend much dollars in marketing, but we did invest a lot of time working on messages, keywords, benefits vs features, etc.)

Firefox OS, possibly they came with all-in PWA/Cordova/Electron apps concept too early with all the native craze of that time, plus barely anybody has heard about it outside of the geek-sphere.

VHS vs Beta ....

I suspect the better question is: has a lesser product won out because of marketing?