[aschampion]

> It is very expensive to build and maintain products across native desktop

Yet (modulo mobile) somehow companies managed to do this in the 90s with far less productive development tools. The difference is the diluted power of the consumer: when software was a purchased product made for Ks of subscribing customers, small contingents of customers being upset about subpar UI and performance was a real threat to the viability of your business. Now Outlook or any Amazon app can be absolute slow, buggy garbage on nearly every platform (and they are), but the enormous customer base (diluting collective action) and entrenchment of locked-in platforms and data mean there's little incentive to obsess about product quality. Instead companies prioritize cost reduction, new customer acquisition (focusing on product chrome refreshes instead of robustness), or just give over to development momentum apathetic to quality.

[BoorishBears]

> modulo mobile

That's cutting out a huge bit of functionality.

> small contingents of customers being upset about subpar UI and performance was a real threat to the viability of your business

Only if there was a better alternative available, there was still plenty of garbage software. If someone made a product like Outlook with the backing that MS can provide, but better performing, everyone would use it. Case in point, G-Mail

[chrisco255]

In the 90s you could get away with making a Windows desktop app and call it a day. No one expected your web site to have all the same functionality as your desktop app. And mobile apps weren't a thing. Mac was also a small enough portion of the market to ignore for many products.