Complex user interfaces in applications like MS Word and Photoshop are the result of many users only using a non-overlapping 10% of the program's features.
Many UI redesigns focus on the features that the majority use and less common features get deprioritized or cut. This could lead to product erosion over time and eventually to a product that no one wants to use.
It is difficult to find a good solution to this problem. Engineering involves making trade-offs with limited resources. The author of the article is clearly frustrated by the deprioritization of the feature they use. I believe they are overstating the severity of the problem when they claim the new search is "bad" because it doesn't fit their narrow use case.
However, Photoshop and MS Word remain huge successes despite their crushing complexity. Some part of that success is likely due to ensuring that existing use cases, even those that affect a small percentage of their users, are catered for in new versions of their products.
Many UI redesigns focus on the features that the majority use and less common features get deprioritized or cut. This could lead to product erosion over time and eventually to a product that no one wants to use.
It is difficult to find a good solution to this problem. Engineering involves making trade-offs with limited resources. The author of the article is clearly frustrated by the deprioritization of the feature they use. I believe they are overstating the severity of the problem when they claim the new search is "bad" because it doesn't fit their narrow use case.
However, Photoshop and MS Word remain huge successes despite their crushing complexity. Some part of that success is likely due to ensuring that existing use cases, even those that affect a small percentage of their users, are catered for in new versions of their products.