zlacker

>>walter+(OP)
Is software just going to get worse from now on? Was the level of quality and feature improvement we've come to expect an artifact of high levels of investment based on expectations of growth that are no longer seen a valid?

>>dmm+j6
We've built stacks so high we're afraid to jump off.

Nobody is really competing because nobody can build a complete product. So there's less pressure to fix the little irritations. Users are mostly satisfied, and problems get worse slowly enough that for the average user they don't notice right away how bad it's getting. So they stay because it's too hard or completely impossible to leave.

>>nixpul+r7
I think the bigger issue is the update model. In the past, if a new version sucked, people wouldn't upgrade. Now with subscriptions / continuous delivery, there's less ability to vote with one's wallet/feet

>>anonym+3a
That's related.

If you're dependent on updating your OS for security fixes and basic compatibility, you are also forced to update the things you may not want to. It's all bundled together.

>>nixpul+6b
But it's not just the OS, but apps too, to say nothing of web SaaS products.

How many times have you launched something only to find the UI had been redone, some feature was now gone or changed, something that worked was now broken, etc.

But it's fine, you see, because we have telemetry and observability and robust CI/CD.

Users and their work are nothing more than ephemeral numbers on a metrics dashboard

>>anonym+xm
100%

Ownership is a critical and fading concept for software. And it makes me really sad and frustrated.