IEEE careers surveys show a similar downward trend.

As executive salaries soar, the workers that produce the real value in a company are being gouged.

The problem being made worse by under-qualified people entering the workforce. To technically illiterate managers, all they see is that these people are prepared to work for lower salaries. The fact that they haven't got the experience, education, aptitude; and can't produce to the desired levels is not understood. As a result the technical management are hauled over coals for failing to meet budgets and deadlines that they had no say in setting.

Why did you accept the lower pay, or leave the job with the higher pay?

Were the hours better, was the work more interesting, did you not have a choice or was there another factor at play?

The work was far more interesting each time. The high paying job was a bullshit Sharepoint app that everyone knew full well would never see the light of day. The middle one was a very, very successful mobile game. The last one was HoloLens.

I think we've long reached the point where there's more very talented people in tech than interesting jobs for them - hence the downward pressure in wages for those interesting jobs.

Were you a contractor? 90k seems really low for MS.

Is the downward pressure a trend? Too many people in the industry? Further blue collarization?

I don't think so. I think it's an illustration that compensation mainly correlates with how much you prioritize compensation. (As opposed to correlating with years worked, skills, or the status of the product.)