A few days ago, Davuluri shared his excitement about it on his official X handle. He seemed very eager to reveal what the company has in mind at the upcoming Ignite event regarding the agentic OS plans.
Unfortunately for Microsoft and Davuluri, the response has been overwhelmingly negative, so much so that the comments on that X post have now been disabled.
Made me laugh. :)
That’s one thing I love about FOSS, that the only stakeholders are the devs and the users. The goal is to make software that’s good at what it does.
When it comes to any tech company’s product, you not only have all the stakeholders that corrupt the end product, but you have giant teams of marketers, designers, engineers, and managers that need to constantly justify their existence and or be efficiently utilized at all times.
Honestly it’s like lesser version of enshittification, the tendency of commercial products to always be changing things.
While this is true, designers are constatnly beholden to management (much like programmers are), so while designers would love to create a nice looking usable application, they end up having to go with the mockups that management requested which are of course a worse experience for the end-user.
It’s really sad.
i feel like a lot of useless bullshit wouldn’t be made if managers and execs didn’t feel the need to validate their useless existence.
Oh I’m well aware, that’s why I threw in the part about needing to be utilized. Because even if the engineers are good with their finished product, some VP will eventually ask their director why the team’s output has dropped or why they have so many people for so little work.
I’m an engineer working on a new product right now. Fortunately we’re a small outfit with niche customers.
In FOSS world, this is only as true for the subset of developers (including both programmers and designers) that are contributing code as their job duties. Additionally that effect is only prominent in projects that are dominated by one organization. Both those things do happen, but there’s also numerous exceptions, too.
Some developers are paid to write unrelated proprietary code and the developer also contributes to open source on their free time. Some projects have so many corporate contributors that none of them can single-handedly direct the development.
Oh, sorry, I wasn’t referencing the FOSS world with my comment. I was responding to the tech company’s part.
My comment was specifically about designers working for companies, with management forcing them to design things in a way that they would rather not.
It’s kind of less about designers having to justify their existence (although, yes, there are far more often entire re-designs that seem like nothing else about this) and more about them being forced to create designs that management want, rather than what end-users want.
That’s what my comment was about.
I mean, then you’re describing bog-standard capitalistic exploitation, and it’s not exclusive to designers.
Sure yeah, my comment originally mentioned designers and developers, but I was too tired to remember that in my follow-up comment.
It’s hard to be extremely detailed and also remember every single detail of what I was mentioning as well.