true but to do that they have 100s of layers of variously backward compatibility and work-arounds. all their stuff is a mountain of deliberate technical debt that will affect the quality of your software
Comment on [deleted]
Diplomjodler3@lemmy.world 2 days ago
Their main goal is to extract maximum revenue, not to provide good products. Also, they’ve grown fat on the monopoly profits they enjoyed for decades. It’s very hard to pivot back to competitiveness from that and as of now, they’re not really compelled to do that.
jimmy90@lemmy.world 1 day ago
Amdouni@lemmy.ml 2 days ago
Aren’t most for profit companies like this tho?
Diplomjodler3@lemmy.world 2 days ago
Not the ones that face actual competition. Younger people have probably never experienced this but markets in general used to be much more diverse and less concentrated.
Amdouni@lemmy.ml 2 days ago
Oh damn
Signtist@bookwyr.me 2 days ago
This is it. For profit companies exit to make a profit, not a product. Any time you ask “why did they do this thing that makes the product worse?” remember that the product doesn’t matter to them, only the money it makes. If a change makes more money, they’ll do it.
Some might think a worse product means worse sales and less profit, but they’d be wrong. Enough people buy products regardless of their qualify that it’s often more profitable to simply make the product as cheap as possible while maintaining just barely enough of the most basic functionality to meet the definition of what they’re trying to sell.