Companies that throw the word "users" around a lot tend to not spend a lot of time actually understanding the people using their product.
Every time I've been responsible for a product, the first thing I've done is make sure we have accurate personas with actual names. Who are the real people using our product? Why are the using it? What makes them happy or sad about it?
I've found that, when presented with good personas, engineering becomes more empathetic for the people using the product, and, as a result, make products that are better for those people (as opposed to better for the engineers, which tends to happen when engineers aren't empathizing with their users).
And I also don't think "users" is a word that needs to be excised from software producer's vocabulary. There are times when you need a word that describes your customers, partners, etc. If you aren't careful, any word you choose there will become too generic.
Every time I've been responsible for a product, the first thing I've done is make sure we have accurate personas with actual names. Who are the real people using our product? Why are the using it? What makes them happy or sad about it?
I've found that, when presented with good personas, engineering becomes more empathetic for the people using the product, and, as a result, make products that are better for those people (as opposed to better for the engineers, which tends to happen when engineers aren't empathizing with their users).
And I also don't think "users" is a word that needs to be excised from software producer's vocabulary. There are times when you need a word that describes your customers, partners, etc. If you aren't careful, any word you choose there will become too generic.