The Consideration Set Is Not the Same as Mindshare
Being present in every comparison is a different commercial asset than being the product someone reaches for first. Perplexity has achieved the former thoroughly enough that its name appears in practitioner surveys, developer toolchains, university curricula, and brand-visibility studies — but the nature of those appearances consistently reveals subordinate positioning. The NYU SPS program that teaches AI skills lists Perplexity alongside ChatGPT and AI image generators as practical tools for beginners ; the Four-Leaf job-search MCP ships with Perplexity support alongside Claude, Cursor, and ChatGPT . These are genuine presences — but they are the presences of a utility, not a preferred platform. Utilities get used; preferred platforms get defended, recommended, and returned to. Perplexity's public narrative currently has the first without the second.
Why Tool Inertia Is a Strategic Problem, Not a Marketing One
The behavioral lock-in argument that circulated this week is more analytically precise than it first appears . The claim is not that ChatGPT is better — it explicitly concedes Perplexity's research quality advantage. The claim is that quality loses to habit, which means the product improvement path does not solve the adoption problem. Perplexity cannot engineer its way out of a situation where users acknowledge its superiority and still do not switch. The only levers that move behavioral inertia at scale are either a forcing function — a context where the incumbent cannot serve the need — or a distribution advantage that puts Perplexity in the hands of users before they have formed habits elsewhere. Perplexity's bet on Comet as its AI browser is the clearest evidence the company understands this; a browser is the forcing-function play. Whether the browser arrives before the consideration set calcifies around two or three dominant tools is the operative question.
The Citation Economy Inflates Apparent Enthusiasm
Perplexity's strongest commercial signal this week came from the marketing and SEO community — and that community's interest is a double-edged asset. The conversations about how to earn citations in AI answer engines treat Perplexity as a high-value target platform , and a PressGEO study that tracked over 1,100 citation queries across AI engines included Perplexity as one of the primary surfaces where brand visibility is contested . That attention is real market validation — it confirms that Perplexity's answers influence buying decisions. But the relationship is adversarial in a subtle way: marketers who are engineering content to appear inside Perplexity's responses are treating it as an audience delivery mechanism, not as a tool they use. Their engagement flatters Perplexity's apparent importance without building user loyalty. When the citation landscape shifts — as Amazon's AI search producing hallucinated products illustrates the fragility of any AI answer engine's authority — the marketers will optimize for the next engine. The relationship is transactional and non-exclusive.
The Developer Workflow Position Has a Natural Ceiling
Developer communities have found a specific and repeatable use for Perplexity: current information retrieval as the first step in a multi-tool chain. The Cursor-plus-Perplexity workflow documented this week is representative — Perplexity surfaces fresh API specifications, Cursor handles code generation, and the combination outperforms single-tool approaches. That is a genuine product advantage rooted in Perplexity's real-time web access and citation structure. The ceiling on that advantage is also visible: it positions Perplexity permanently upstream of the tools developers are more emotionally and professionally invested in. The developer who writes tutorials about this workflow is teaching Perplexity as a research preprocessor. That is a durable niche; it is not a path to becoming the tool someone identifies with. The Vercel AI SDK's continued support for Perplexity as a provider confirms the infrastructure positioning is solidifying — not a leading indicator of category leadership.
Where the Narrative Goes From Here
Perplexity's public narrative is heading toward permanent infrastructure status unless the Comet browser or a comparable distribution bet produces a context in which the tool is someone's first and only interface — not one option in a configured stack. The company has the revenue and valuation to sustain that bet. What the current conversations make clear is that community sentiment will not pull it across the threshold on its own. The communities that mention Perplexity most — developers, marketers, AI educators — have all settled into relationships with it that do not require them to prefer it. The users who might switch from ChatGPT have already identified the behavioral barrier and decided it is not worth clearing . Perplexity's best advocates are the ones who acknowledge its quality and then explain why they are not using it — a category of endorsement that does not compound.