Unfortunately, this isn't how (web?) devs work. For a whole host of reasons, devs always prefer the new thing. This is likely a combination of factors: fashion

Unfortunately, this isn't how (web?) devs work. For a whole host of reasons, devs always prefer the new thing. This is likely a combination of factors: fashion (the same general social tendencies that make fashion a thing in any other industry), youth (new people are continuously joining the profession) but probably most of all: curiosity and a desire to learn new things. You can try and model things on the idea of rational experienced senior devs all making tech decisions based purely on hard evidence-based demonstrations of material benefit of new tech over old tech, but reality is much softer than that. Another factor is that Google's hold over SEO allows them to drive change through SEO requirements. E.g. there's always been a lot of overlap between new tech introduced and Chrome and requirements for Google search indexing, and that stands to increase with things like Core Web Vitals, > rapid change in the standards is not really a sign of monopoly Your statement here seems to be just picked from the ether and not actually based on anything in reality: there's no reason rapid change cannot be associated with monopoly. There are many differences between how Google is approaching tech and how Microsoft did in the late 90s / early 00s but the its worth noting that second E in their infamous Embrace, Extend, Extinguish strategy most certainly involves rapid change in standards. This is hardly the only example, but it's notable I didn't even have to pick a different industry to find one.