[hypfer]

Speaking entirely out of my ass here:

FOMO for sure is one of the driving factors.

"We cannot risk looking outdated". So weak management, probably.

But also talent availability I suppose. If there's a new trend, the pool of people you can hire include many that are in on that trend.

UI frameworks too, probably. The modern thing™ does the modern thing™ and you do want to be on the modern thing, because you fear that only that receives security fixes or whatever.

[darkwater]

If UIs today still looked exactly the same as Windows 2.0 or System 7 or CDE people will be bored to death. Aesthetics come and go and come back, it's part of how humanity worked for a few centuries already.

[hypfer]

Do I need to be entertained by my butter knife, mop or screwdriver?

I really don't think that "keeping people entertained" is a sensible goal within the context of building software as tools and not software-adjacent Art.

Which is not to say that I would not want a great and polished experience, but that is not equivalent to "being entertained".

___

It would be nice if not everything one interacts with would try to get some sort of emotion out of me. Bring back being bored.

[Telaneo]

For some of us, the OS isn't a fashion statement, but rather a tool which is to be used to achieve other goals. It shifting around and changing its look is in fact a downside in that context.

I don't think I know any non-tech people who like things changing about. Some tech people like that (I don't), but for the non-techy, it's just another thing they have to relearn for no good reason.

[xorcist]

Why do people say that? I am not bored by my Braun alarm clock, neither by my Singer sewing machine or my De Buyer cookware. Why would I be bored by well executed digital desktop designs such as BeOS, AmigaOS or even Windows 2000?

[allarm]

> people will be bored to death

As opposed to what? Be entertained by all the bells and whistles of modern operating systems that have practically unusable user interfaces?