What happens instead is companies keep rewarding executives by increases in revenue, they keep rewarding product managers similarly, and product managers selectively choose metrics that optimize immediate revenue, at the expense of brand loyalty. This is happening to almost every tech company, and the exceptions are rare gems.
In android, if I click on a link in facebook messenger that takes me to facebook, the back button takes me "back" to facebook's home screen instead of to the messenger app. Tapping back button again does nothing. I have to switch back to messenger manually. That's 5-6 taps/swipes instead of 1, because a product manager's bonus in FB depends on how well they beg for more engagement. As a result, I rarely use any of these products. I used to spend some time in Instagram/FB. I close LinkedIn immediately after an important interaction for similar reasons.
I made a mistake of buying another Samsung product after years. Never again. I made a mistake of buying another HP product, never again. I might still consider Dell only because of how well they supported me with their monitor flicker.
None of these products have a defect that's caused by poor design, programming, or manufacturing. They all suffer from growth-obsessed mindset.
Brother is what it is, not because of lack of innovation, but because of deliberate evasion of short-sighted greed.
Imagine a human being with a growth mindset. He optimises his bodyfat to the point of anorexia. He optimises conversations by extracting knowledge then moving on. His diet is pure protein shakes and broccoli. Every morning he does six Leetcode Hards. If you met him you'd think he was deranged.
This growth ideology means every company we interact with behaves like Bob. Soon enough this Bobism filters into people through the labour market and professional values. (Like the Leetcoders). It's alienating and the only purpose it serves is an investment based economy with unclear benefits to society at large
It creates a very strange world where we have computers acting like people and people acting like machines
But there seems to exist another phenomenon that is described in the book The Mindset, where the term originates, which is quite different.
Let's take some examples from partner dancing which I am very familiar with.
In some dance cultures, it is customary for the leader to try to maximize the area on the dance floor that is occupied (or "owned") by the couple. This is done, so you can dance more freely, do whatever you please. Such leaders may use many methods, such as intimidation and even physical force to push "weaker" leaders away from the area they consider their own.
There are other dance cultures, where the leaders try to co-operate. For them, the area on the dance floor is shared. I feel where the other leaders are going, in a way I dance with the other leaders as well. We will try to harmonize our movements so that we can all share the area. The leaders who are able to effectively use the space are highly valued in such cultures. Beginners are given a little bit more slack, of course, but at the same time, non-cooperating leaders may be pushed out by the co-operating leaders.
I once participated in an Argentine tango dance event (called a milonga) in Buenos Aires, which was for locals only. Many milongas are filled with tourists, so the locals try to keep the tourists out from certain events they consider their own.
I was invited to the event by a friend, a follower, who knows many locals and so is accepted member of that event. But even knowing my friend did not give me any slack, but my co-operation was put into a rough test from the beginning.
Many leaders intentionally surrounded me on the dance floor, and pressured me from all sides. As I am quite experienced in dancing in small spaces, I did not hesitate and was able to continue my dancing and keep co-operating with the other leaders although they were putting me into this test. After I had passed this test, I was accepted, and the testing stopped.
I have also been invited into events where one key requirement to even get allowed to apply is that the organisers know your dancing, and they especially need to know that you will co-operate. These are lovely events, because the level of co-operation is very high.
I think one key part of the real growth mindset is co-operation. You give up on fighting for some resource (in this case, the area you occupy on the dance floor), and you will gain something more valuable -- co-operation with the peers -- and through this co-operation you will have enough of the resource you need -- in this case you will always have enough space for your dancing.
Another part of the real growth mindset appears to be the attitude of anti-fragility. If I accept the challenge of trying to learn to dance without aggressively trying to occupy space -- even though I would be skilled enough to do it -- that pressure will eventually teach me to become an even better dancer. It is not easy, however, it may take years of persistent effort to overcome this hurdle. But without this pressure I would have never learned.