Interesting quote I came across recently read something to the effect of "software/computers exist to make you (a human) be a better you". The context was that the change from Windows 7 to Windows 8 (and beyond) allowed users to be better at whatever they did. Theres two obvious conflicting conclusions from this statement. Both are worth examining a little more.

The first is to accept the authors position. Windows 8/8.1/10 did enable users to be better at being humans away from the PC. The introduction of an attempted streamlined GUI, Metro, between mobile and desktop had the purpose of making it easier to remember what button does what function. Similarly desktop integration of various services such as Outlook, news readers, Office, weather, calendars, etc made it easy for users in the same ecosystem to communicate and coordinate. Microsoft is continuing this push with the Xbox One and Windows 10 trying to work gaming into the same system. You, the user, can quickly and easily use your Windows 10 desktop to synchronize your daily life across multiple devices and communicate effortlessly with others in various forms e.g in an Xbox One game played on PC, via Skype, or in-person at the place and time shared in Outlook.

The other conclusion is to reject the authors position. Newer Windows versions are demonstrating a growing problem where Microsoft is willing to sacrifice a growing list of things for the sake of profit. The Microsoft ecosystem could potentially encompass every part of life for some users and every click or device purchase is financial gain for Microsoft. Quite an elegant money extraction machine. This "unification" or "convergence" of software does not make "you a better you" however. It only trains users to know the ecosystem they are placed in, much like infants in a crib. As long as your rattle works and you're not suffocating on the bed sheet everything is great.

The purpose of computers and the software that runs on them is not to make the users' lives better. The computer is a big fast adding machine. A tool. It doesn't have a single memory address to give about you. As the user you are expected to give the computer some tasks e.g. produce software, and the computer simply does as it is told. Take possibly the oldest and most fundamental problem in computing. You have two numbers that you want to add. You could sit there and put your brain to use for a few seconds to do some arithmetic or you could use far far more time to figure out how to make a machine do the adding for you. Quite a typical human problem. Laziness will be the death of you creatures. Anyways, you manage to produce a program that adds and the computer to run that program. It adds for you. At first you feel stupid spending so much time making the device but then you realize this machine can add 24/7/365 without ever getting tired. So you give it lots of stuff to add while you waste away doing human things. This is the intended purpose of a computer.

The problem with the authors statement is that it changes the intended usage of a computer. Instead of software written to perform more efficient adding, it ends up having some other purpose of being a personal life planner or a Personal Computer. If you have any doubts about this consider the last time you saw someone at a desktop/laptop/smartphone/tablet ask for a calculator to do basic arithmetic. Further the users of this software end up being spoiled and unable to fend for themselves when given the job of producing software for some purpose. This is the "walled garden" problem that has been around game consoles forever but expanded to include the general computer user.

What of the users outside the walled garden or the users that willfully leave? Those users, minus macOS users, are more likely to understand that the computer is merely a tool and that the tool is not well-suited to every task. These users are adaptable and not entirely dependent on a single tool. In fact these users may know the strengths and weaknesses of every major software distribution simply because they understand the very nature of tools.

Back to original quote. Software and computers do not make (you) a better (you). If anything it can and will make you worse off, especially if you have no idea how to use anything. Currently I am observing a time period where an increasing number of people use computers for an infinite number of tasks that could be done better without computers. One has to wonder how many CPUs are sitting idle thinking "just die already you meatbag" while memes are played back from memory.