This is a question about process. There has been a lot of discussion in Mac/OSX sites about how bad the new version of iTunes is, so i will not add to that list. But what strikes me is that each consecutive version is worse. Many people remember the early versions of iTunes as easy to use, easy to learn, intuitive... but after reaching a level of friendliness it seemed to deteriorate. Now doing simple things like filtering a list of songs that meet a description (artist, title, etc.) you get non-intuitive graphic icons that need to be manipulated by control clicks... creating playlists... I find it easier just to go to the Finder. I saw the same process with iMovie, becoming more intuitive, easier and easier to use, till a 12 year old could sit down and make a good video with no assistance, then after version 6 or so quality deteriorates, becoming more and more like Final Cut until it requires taking a class to use. My question is: What is the process and forces that causes generations of software to reach a peak then to get more unfriendly and less useful? Why isnt this caught by focus groups who try beta versions and ask "What is this?" Do good designers get promoted into other challenges and get replaced with less competent engineers who want to "make it better"? This sounds a bit like the Peterson Principle. As an added note, i originally posted the questions in Apple Discussions iTunes. It was deleted within hours "... because it contained non-constructive rants or complaints" but i certainly mean it as a sincere question about cultural process. I understand their concern with marketing strategies on their Forum site but i think the fact the thread was deleted explains something. I suspect that all software is subject to version pejoration but that it is far more common in large corporations which cannot have real constructive conversations with their customer base.