Sounds awfully familiar. One of our customer wanted a very specific option our system does not provide - because it makes no sense at all. But instead that the customer discusses what is good and what is not, based on our >40 years of international experience in the field, we just got a bunch of drawings telling me that I should do something in the way a political committee with no professional input had decided.

Customer pays for it, customer gets it. Fun fact: I know they will get sick of what they cooked up in no time, so I already installed a "kill switch". As soon as they get sick of their stupid idea, I can reverse it with a single option. Bossman says to take the same amount of money for switching it back, and he knows they will pay.

Counterpoint: devs frequently downplay user's needs and inflate the importance of their own ideas, and because they're often in an echo chamber of their own team's environment, they never hear meaningful kickback from anyone they respect (because they certainly don't respect users).

Then they share this comic back forth literally every time users complain.

Someone, in the slack channels of reddit's devs, shared this exact comic with this exact attitude because of the backlash. And it was met with the same approval as the comments here.

Sounds like a future forever paid customer to me. Want overheating back? Pay $4.99 per month in perpetuity and ongoing maintenance costs lol.

Minecraft players when an update changes something thats been a certain way from the beginning.

And this is why I don't update my installed Python modules fequently...

Emacs itself is actually impressively good at not breaking workflows, given how configurable the package is.

The user's always right

god I fuckin hate corporate buzzwords