I think the idiomatic form of "user" is perfectly clear within industry. In particular, a "user" is a stakeholder that makes use of the product but not necessar

I think the idiomatic form of "user" is perfectly clear within industry. In particular, a "user" is a stakeholder that makes use of the product but not necessarily pay for it... otherwise, he would have been called a "client" or "customer". Originally, this distinction was used in corporate software markets to make a distinction between the entity who made the purchase and the chumps who would end up interacting with the product on a day to day basis (thus enjoying/enduring the consequences of said purchase). On contrast, by redefining "users" as "people" we stripe the term of one of its fundamental qualities. You might notice that "people" is now redefined as stakeholders that get somehow affected by - but not necessarily make (direct) use of - your product. Am I the only one who finds this blurring of concepts disturbingly Orwellian???