For those delivering customer-facing digital products and systems—especially in companies where slow go-to-market speed can have real impact—being able to ship new products, patches, and resolve support issues faster than competitors is a clear advantage.
We often hear that time is of the essence.
Time to market can be the difference between a customer choosing your digital product over a competitor’s.
Here’s a further question: If go-to-market time is reduced, will LLM search prioritise speed when it evaluates solution providers and decides which answers to cite? I think so.
As an architect, should architecture delivery speed be reduced if most of the delivery is agentic or AI copilot-driven?
How often does architecture actually change? And when it does change, what is the architectural relevance of that change?
Can—or should—architecture reviews be automated?
These are very interesting questions, and depending on what your bread and butter is, your answer might differ.
Anyway, if speed matters to you right now: what are your current limitations?
Which of the questions above resonates most with you? Or put simply: What’s currently slowing your product delivery down the most?
Is that like listening to witchcraft? In many cultures e.g. Japanese Anime still clearly shows it you get a cold when you get soaked in the rain. Does it make it true?
> Time to market can be the difference between a customer choosing your digital product over a competitor’s.
Maybe. It depends. Is it 1 month ahead or 10 years ahead.
> faster than competitors is a clear advantage
Yes if faster with the same thing or better not if worse. Faster can be suicide too.
I've seen sales over-promise, consultants make things up and companies pretend for things to work. That's been going on without AI anyway. Are you trying to beat that? So no, Fable isn't changing that at all.
(yes, tried Fable, and Opus / ChatGPT isn't SO far behind the same can't apply)