+1 to this. Like a lot of issues, I think the root is ideological, but this one in particular very clearly manifests organizationally.
The companies building everyday software are ever bigger— full of software engineers, designers and various kinds of managers who are asked to justify their generous salaries. At an individual level I'm sure there's all sorts of cases, but at a general level there's often almost no other option but to introduce change for the sake of change.
I once asked a man who worked in marketing why Oreos keep making crazy new flavors like "sour patch kids Oreos" when the normal kind is great and clearly has no issues being sold. I could see some upside - it gets people talking about them, it's fun, it reinforces the normal flavor as the best chocolate cookie, etc. but I was still dubious that those benefits outweighed the cost of developing new flavors in a lab, paperwork for food safety, a new manufacturing process, new ads, new packaging, etc. especially for something temporary.
He said it's often just some new marketing exec wants to put something on their resume, and they have certain metrics that they target that don't necessarily align with long term profits of the company.
+1 to this. Like a lot of issues, I think the root is ideological, but this one in particular very clearly manifests organizationally.
The companies building everyday software are ever bigger— full of software engineers, designers and various kinds of managers who are asked to justify their generous salaries. At an individual level I'm sure there's all sorts of cases, but at a general level there's often almost no other option but to introduce change for the sake of change.