[Retric]

I have yet to see a highly complex piece of enterprise software that people actually liked to use. Honestly, I think the current state of enterprise throw everything and the kitchen sink at the problem software just demonstrates the downsides of a complex and highly configurable system. If you don’t know what people will be using it for then you can’t build a streamlined system.

[mindcrime]

  I have yet to see a highly complex piece of enterprise 
  software that people actually liked to use. Honestly, I 
  think the current state of enterprise throw everything 
  and the kitchen sink at the problem software just 
  demonstrates the downsides of a complex and highly 
  configurable system. If you don’t know what people will 
  be using it for then you can’t build a streamlined system.

True, true. And that's why I find articles like the parent useful, because they do serve to remind use that we should strive for simplicity... That is, while I may largely disagree with what seems to be the "logical conclusion" of the article, I don't disagree that things should be, as they say, "as simple as possible, but no simpler." And since I am working on some "complex, enterprise software" - and being aware of how notorious this kind of stuff is for NOT being friendly and easy to use - I feel drawn to try and break that trend by making things that are both powerful and flexible, but without being confusing and difficult. It's a difficult balance to strike, and I don't claim to have all the answers, but at least acknowledging the problem and having that as a goal is a start, I think.