[thih9]

I guess companies are more interested in mainstream users than in technical users. The former are a larger group that seems easier to attract and retain, they mostly use defaults and don’t care that much about dark patterns.

Google has been following this approach for years now, simplifying the UX in a way that both 1. makes the product easier to use and 2. in a way that benefits Google.

Google has merged the url bar and the search bar in chrome, they force defaults on google search, and not long ago [1] we were discussing removing detailed cookie controls.

[1]: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28407656

[usui]

I would like to posit the idea that all feature changes target #2 far more than #1: to benefit Google as an org.

What if the emphasis of mainstream users is overstated? I find it more likely that an organization could be shaping features to coax its users into submission to make the org's life easier.

"Yes, mainstream users want this simplification. No, we can't share the data or methodology in which we surmised this. Yes, this makes our life vastly easier, but we want to excuse it by pinning it on mainstream users."

I've seen power apps (so by definition all the users are very technical and should not be patronized) that use the same reason to cut features instead of saying outright that it's too much to support. Maybe for a big org like Google it would be an admission of embarrassment.