As someone teaching electronics, media technology and programming at a art university I'd argue that the space between those who chose a solution because they didn't know it any better and those who considered every available option and made the rational choice is not only big, but the borders are foggy as well.

At least with my students who are usually not experts at electronics, programming or similar things, the chosen solutions are often ridiculously naive. They would probably also work 90% of the time — however they would (and do!) pay that naive approach by gaining an unreliable, expensive, overly complex rube goldberg type of system that falls appart when the stars don't align in just the right way.

People like these are extremely grateful when you sit down with them for a while, analyze their problem, explain some possible solutions to them and then in turn discover that there is a solution that is magnitudes less work, has magnitudes less moving parts and will probably also work in a decade. And you can do that without forcing your language or other strong preferences on them.

There are many companies who chose the solutions they chose because they cannot imagine something else, they only have an employee who does x etc as well — but assuming you can just recommend a thing and everything complicated about the problem would be neatly encapsulated and solved is naive as well.