Strongly, 100% agreed. Especially that "catering to users inabilities" leads to dumbed down software sucking out oxygen from any problem space, leading to frustration and inefficiency for those users who have jobs to do in it. This is becoming more of a problem now that a lot of software is collaborative in nature, meaning you're stuck with whatever your team or company uses.
The way I see it, we suffer from a bad case of "worse is better" here. The amount of utility a piece of software provides can be to first order expressed as (Number of users * Average productivity * Average result of the results of using the software). Unfortunately, the revenue of a typical SaaS vendor is proportional only to the number of users. Dumbing down the interface and trimming features increases the number of users, but kills the right part of productivity and result utility distributions. In other words: more people doing less with worse tools.
The way I see it, we suffer from a bad case of "worse is better" here. The amount of utility a piece of software provides can be to first order expressed as (Number of users * Average productivity * Average result of the results of using the software). Unfortunately, the revenue of a typical SaaS vendor is proportional only to the number of users. Dumbing down the interface and trimming features increases the number of users, but kills the right part of productivity and result utility distributions. In other words: more people doing less with worse tools.