[wtallis]

I don't think software companies ship UI churn because they're running out of things to do with their development resources. They're just bad at rewarding bug fixing and bad at saying no to user-visible changes that aren't meaningful improvements big enough to overcome the pain of making users re-learn a changed UI. Microsoft doesn't need to scale down their Windows development resources, they just need to make them do the less-fun parts of their jobs instead of shipping new intern project rewrites of Notepad.

[pseudohadamard]

> I don't think software companies ship UI churn because they're running out of things to do with their development resources.

I think that's exactly why they do it: "Our division has 600 developers that we're paying large amounts of wages to, if we try and fix some bugs no-one notices but if we roll out the 357th UI refresh everyone notices. OK, UI refresh it is then".

[wtallis]

You say "that's exactly why they do it" then go on to describe something entirely different: an organization with plenty of options to spend their development resources on, and they make their decision not out of a lack of options but due to misaligned incentives. Which is exactly the point I already made.

[vrighter]

nah, it's just people wanting to pad their resume. And your resume is usually first read by someone who's only impressed by stuff they can see