If it aint broke don't fix it

Online/cloud tools that companies depend on, are more able to update their user interface/mechanics without any input from users, than in the days where customers bought their software products from a store and installed them from floppy disks/CDs. Back in the day, if you needed/wanted to update your software, you would either travel to your local brick-and-mortar software store to either pick up a free disk, or purchase said update. These days, software companies continue to update their software online, with no notice and with little regard to whether or not: a) their paying customers need/want the update b) the update is an improvement on something. I will of course ignore security updates which are a whole different story. So why is updating their product too frequently a bad thing? Well, for one thing, paying customers don't always want the update in the least case, but in the worst case, these updates can drastically modify the interface in a way that isolates long time users, for no discernable reason. End users don't necessarily know why the update was put in, or why the menu items/icons they used to know the location of is completely different. End users, even of web products are either forced to endure "helpful" popups of what's new, or need to read long, overly complicated release notes that are aimed at power users/administrators of online products. Some examples of this from my day to day life: (I will obfuscate product names) 1) an online time tracking product now has a feature that by default will detect what ticket you have been working on and helpfully bombard your time entry product with "suggestions" of tickets you could enter. This is both distracting and insulting, and only comes from the fact that the Time Tracking product can read from the ticketing product and vice versa. After months of this annoyance, I found that there is a way to shut down this integration, but the fact that this "new feature" was set as default is what was super annoying. The company making this product assumed that their new feature would be useful to all of its users, despite the fact that its distracting and provides unnecessary clutter. 2) A popular browser company used to have a feature where, if you wanted to re-open a close tab, you right-clicked on the new tab button, and you would see a list of recently closed tabs. They decided for whatever reason that this was too convenient, and that you now needed to move your mouse all the way over to the left side of your tab bar, and click the little down arrow which listed every single tab you have currently open (I have lots at any given time), and if you scroll all the way down, you can see the tabs that you recently closed and click the appropriate closed tab to re-open it. Why they felt the need to change this? I have no idea, but its less useful, less convenient and an attempt at fixing a problem that is just not there. 3) A popular operating system company is constantly changing their UI to move things around and make sure that people who have a wealth of experience in their prior product are now experientially poor. Why they feel the need to constantly shuffle things around without making reasonable changes, I will never know. There are a multiple of reasons each of these products became popular, so why, when they have market share, do they now make changes to the original formula in a Coke-Zero-style, marketing initiated, executive-approved decision that does nothing other than try to fix problems that never existed and alienate their core customer base. I guess we'll never know. TL;DR: Companies with online products, stop shuffling your UI around for the purpose of giving your UI designers something to do, and ask your paying customers before you make big changes to your product.