> For me it’s the prevalence and growth of tools with completely shitty user interfaces. Indeed. I'm old school green screen hack, but I think that user inter

> For me it’s the prevalence and growth of tools with completely shitty user interfaces. Indeed. I'm old school green screen hack, but I think that user interfaces are a black hole of time and bike shedding. Back in the day it was a green screen. If you were lucky, you might have line drawing characters. Mind, we're talking smart terminals and curses level work here, vs block mode IBM displays, but still. When options are limited, there's less time spent on discussing and implementing options. Did people settle? Yes, they did. They made do, they made it work, and work got done. I recall a tire store running a linux desktop with their work order system some green screen app in a terminal. Yet, tires still got mounted and sold. I think they've changed recently, but Lowes used a terminal based UI for all of their order taking and work orders. Whether it was a stove or carpet installation or buying a couple of chaptiks and a 30 pack of batteries. The employees were adept at navigating it and got the job done. Did they require training? Of course they did. But training was required no matter what the UI was, as they UIs simple encase process. Process unique to the company, and those processes always have to be trained. Just raw truth. I'm no artist, I have no color sense, my layouts are a struggle, and putting 3 fields on a 5K screen is challenging no matter what. But I think the real values of the capabilities of modern UIs are marginal at best for most routine use cases, specifically in the back office (where the vast majority of software is designed and written).