> Bring it up with your manager and they should push for it if it makes sense. Wholly agreed, but the word "should" is dual-meaning there. The implication I g

> Bring it up with your manager and they should push for it if it makes sense. Wholly agreed, but the word "should" is dual-meaning there. The implication I get from the article is that even if management "should" listen to this feedback and push for change, it doesn't necessarily do that, given the track record of overworking people and having little change in the software since the beginning of the company. It's a little easier to believe they top-down ordered the worker bees to shut up and be happy with the tools than it is to believe they nailed the best UX for 2021 chip-building in 1987... Sure, sure, sure: they are massively successful and that must mean there are zero improvements they can make to their processes, as the ancestor comment implies. Or maybe, just maybe, they could continue working on efficiency and do even better.