Adapted by:
Javier Lacort
Senior WriterI write long-form content at Xataka about the intersection between technology, business and society. I also host the daily Spanish podcast Loop infinito (Infinite Loop), where we analyze Apple news and put it into perspective.
Alba Mora
WriterAn established tech journalist, I entered the world of consumer tech by chance in 2018. In my writing and translating career, I've also covered a diverse range of topics, including entertainment, travel, science, and the economy.
Midjourney recently launched its V7 model after a year without any updates. During that time, OpenAI has transformed ChatGPT into a powerful image generation tool that’s rapidly gaining market share. The contrast between the two is stark: While Midjourney was developing patiently, OpenAI was busy capturing the market.
This scenario illustrates a fundamental principle in the industry. The best technology doesn’t always outperform the best distribution strategy. A similar situation is unfolding with Claude.
Less than two years ago, Midjourney was the undisputed leader in AI image generation. Its creations surpassed others in artistic quality and the ability to interpret complex prompts. Midjourney’s tool especially contrasted with OpenAI’s DALL-E, which was still producing only rudimentary images. Meanwhile, Stable Diffusion required technical expertise that was out of reach for most users.
Midjourney was setting trends, making headlines, and sparking discussions about digital art. However, its product development was too slow and overly tied to Discord, a platform designed for gamers rather than visual creators. Although its new website is a significant improvement, it doesn’t enhance user capabilities or facilitate creative exploration.
Meanwhile, OpenAI has seamlessly integrated advanced image generation into ChatGPT without needing a dedicated product. It simply employs the same user-friendly interface as its chatbot. The difference is striking. There’s no friction, no need for additional apps, and no complex interfaces. Plus, users don’t need to learn specific commands to create images.
Product development at Midjourney has been somewhat disappointing. It’s taken a year to transition from V6 to V7. Its website still resembles a polished and attractive version of Discord rather than a dedicated interface designed to stimulate users’ creativity. This stands in stark contrast to the agility demonstrated by OpenAI.
What’s particularly striking–though not necessarily positive–is that the current debate surrounding these tools revolves around superficial features, such as the ability to generate Studio Ghibli-style images. What should be a creative revolution has turned into a scramble for the latest viral feature. Midjourney, once a pioneer in the field, now finds itself responding reactively to trends set by others.
Integration is key. Millions of users access ChatGPT daily to write text, generate code, and answer questions. Now, they can also create images using the same tool. In contrast, with Midjourney, you need a separate account, a different interface, and a completely distinct workflow.
This is similar to why Windows Phone failed despite its appealing design, or why few people use Proton Mail despite its superior privacy. Convenience often trumps technical excellence.
Midjourney CEO David Holz describes the new V7 model as a “totally different architecture.” However, the question remains: Does this matter when the public has already normalized using ChatGPT for various tasks, including image creation? If success is defined by user adoption, Midjourney has already fallen behind.
The best innovation often lies not in creating the most advanced technology, but in integrating good enough technology where people already are. Distribution is crucial. This is a lesson Midjourney has learned too late, making it one of the biggest casualties of ChatGPT’s powerful image generation capabilities.
Image | Midjourney
Log in to leave a comment