Oh, I'm aware. I work in enterprise software. I see what the customers want. I've also been on the receiving end: my company has one tool that doesn't work wel

Oh, I'm aware. I work in enterprise software. I see what the customers want. I've also been on the receiving end: my company has one tool that doesn't work well. So for three years, there's been a push to get rid of it, but there's never been agreement on any replacement. There's one particular use case that stakeholders think isn't handled by the replacements. The result is that we use both tools, and manually synchronize them. Someone wrote a bespoke automated tool to bridge those two SaaS apps, but it doesn't remove the manual synchronization, just reduces it. Oh, these tools? They aren't for something low touch. People are in both tools constantly. There are questions about which pieces of information are accurate, and who's responsible for which updates. The time waste is significant. But the problem isn't the software. The problem is that people can't make a decision. When you ask someone higher up, you get vague assurances that we're still thinking about the issue. In the case of the companies with their mergers, having one tool support both systems isn't doing anyone any favors. It just lets them limp along with excess complexity.