• Modern_medicine_isnt@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    4 months ago

    When the buyer isn’t the user (which is most of the time), no there isn’t. Competitors try to win with great sounding features and other marketing BS because that is all the director will see. The users are then left with the product that has all the bells and whistles, but is terrible at doing what actually needs to be done. And the competition is the same, so they don’t really have much choice. Bell’s and whistles are cheaper than making it work well.

    • efstajas@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      4 months ago

      So you’re talking about SaaS / business tooling then? Again though, that’s just one of many segments of software, which was my point.

      Also, even in that market it’s just not true to say that there’s no incentive for it to work well. If some new business tool gets deployed and the workforce has problems with it to the point of measurable inefficiency, of course that can lead to a different tool being chosen. It’s even pretty common practice for large companies to reach out to previous users of a given product through consultancy networks or whatever to assess viability before committing to anything.

      • Modern_medicine_isnt@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        4 months ago

        Nor necessarily SaaS, but yes business tooling. Which is the vast majority of software if you include software businesses buy and make thier customers use. The incentive is for it to work, not for it to work well. The person who signed off on the purchase either will never know how bad it is because they don’t use it and are insulated by other staff from feedback, or because they are incentivesed to downplay and ignore complaints to make thier decision look good at their level in the company.