> you're change averse It's funny that that's used like it's a negative thing. No-one wants their tools to change out from under them. Shuffling stuff around

> you're change averse It's funny that that's used like it's a negative thing. No-one wants their tools to change out from under them. Shuffling stuff around for no reason subverts learned skill in using a tool, decreasing its usefulness. And the only purpose of a tool is to be useful. The fact that Google makeovers are that – makeovers – rather than incremental enhancements, tells me that they don't really have a purpose beyond looking good, or allowing some internal rearchitecting that is incompatible with the old design. If the changes are really productivity enhancements, why save them up to roll out as a distracting redesign?