[lazyier]

> Could this be a positive change?

It's normal and expected evolution of protocols and software.

Generation 1: New idea, new implementation. As people become comfortable with the new idea it gains in acceptance and hype. Try to keep it simple and fast, but it's a exercise in exploration and it gains technical debt faster then it gains new features.

Generation 2: Widespread acceptance and commercialization. Groups inside large corporations, and sometimes entire businesses, spring up around the new idea. They re-implement the idea to reduce technical debt and add flexibility. Features are piled on to make it marketable. Eventually becomes heavy and unwieldy.

Generation 3: Hype train dies down and people have learned what really matters and what really should be focused on. Third generation is lean, fast, and 'correct'. It becomes ubiquitous, people stop caring about it and people stop paying for it. It becomes just something that is always there and ends up little more then a building block for the next new idea.

[lnenad]

Generation 4: Bloat the software with so many unnecessary features, the users must want to chat with each other no?

[lazyier]

There isn't any generation 4. The functionality of the software is ubiquitous by that point. Nobody cares anymore except when they absolutely have no other choice. By that point even if you generated a brand new implementation you would struggle to give it away unless it was just one small part of a new innovation.

[Razengan]

Mustn't forget that social media sharing to show that we are also hip and down with the fellow kids.

[jazzdev]

This sounds like Jared Spool's Market Maturity model.[0] He breaks up your gen 3 into two separate stages:

Stage 1: Raw Iron Stage 2: Checklist Battles Stage 3: Productivity Wars Stage 4: Transparency

[0] https://articles.uie.com/market_maturity/