[sfRattan]

I've met plenty of people who want to make products that solve problems, even if the product's user only has those problems once in a while. Reaching for a well-liked, well-matched tool whenever a problem arises isn't addicted or quasi-addicted or "as though" addicted behavior.

Once you're thinking about how to keep a user coming back, you're in the mutually adversarial design space, whatever language is used to more pleasantly redecorate that reality.

[grassfedgeek]

You can't be a good designer if you aren't thinking about how to get your users to love your product so much that they keep coming back. There are good and bad ways to keep users coming back. The good way is to simply make the product very useful. The bad way is to make the user psychologically dependent on your product in some way.

[antiframe]

Yet almost everyone uses dark patterns, which imply they don't think their product is good enough for users to return on their own volition. In fact, I can't think of a single for-profit company that doesn't use at least one dark pattern.

[Xirdus]

I can think of one such company. Full disclosure: I work for them. It's a successful startup where the entire retention strategy is for our product to be so freaking amazing you'll never want to use anything else. It's been working very well so far. But our product really is freaking amazing.

[antiframe]

Since I posted I thought of another one (assuming you don't work for them). But, they really are rare. I see dark patterns everywhere, so I have a visceral reaction to any claims that companies respect users.