The saying 'camel is a horse made by a committee' applies to this situation. There was almost certainly no base creative drive when creating the actual product. Most things that end up being good are driven by someone who is viewed as somewhat crazy but has enough power or force to get what they want and/or steam roll others.

Not to mention I am sure they are confusing smarts with luck. The decision makers think of themselves as where they are because they are really smart and less lucky and opportunistic.

camels are amazing creatures that are more useful than horses in a wide range of situations.

That's the point of the adage. The hypothetical committee was supposed to come up with a fast animal to ride (horse). But then everyone wanted it to address their specific concern. In the end, they created something good in many situations (camel), but at the cost of the overall gaol.

What's interesting is that in a buyers mind (or a users mind) there is often something that outweighs many practical concerns which a committee would say 'a deal braker'.

One example of this is the very first Porsche 911 that I bought years ago. I had never tried to sit in the rear seats I just saw it had rear seats 'ok it can seat 4 people'. Of course the reason I bought the 911 had zero to do with practicality or what you would consider 'features'. It was entirely emotional that was the reason. So I had ordered the car and went to the dealer to pick it up. And then found that only small children could fit in those seats (or at least without great distress). But I still took the car and have since bought 3 newer models. The rear seats come in handy to throw stuff behind you packages and what not. And in a pinch sure someone can sit there (on Cayman/Boxster no go).

Camels are much more robust than horses.

So it must be a visual comparison. They also say that camels have poor temperament.