Changing words reflect worldly dynamics. Just as people use money to achieve aims there is a meta-game in etymology, beyond the communicative use of words. They don't just randomly change or 'evolve' as if by Dawinism. Coining a good phrase can make a business or career. Power comes through words. An interesting analog connects words to money.

  They are 'minted', by small groups or individuals, to serve a local
  need.

  They can be 'issued' by PR/news/sales people, spin-doctors and
  propagandists, or enter popular use through education or popular
  science.

  They lose their 'currency' like "coins that wear down and lose their
  faces".

  They are 'appropriated', taken and reused by other groups.

  They can come back into circulation as old ideas cycle round.

Much of it is simply down to changing (and mostly improving) technologies. It doesn't make sense to talk about mainframes or peripherals in an age of "clouds" and tightly integrated handheld clients. But in computing I've also seen plenty of churn with meanings that reveal a battleground of ideas, frequently with near religious fervour. For example, wasn't "Object Orientation" more than a mere programming approach? A couple of decades ago it was heretical to talk of other paradigms. And yet, in some progressive circles to talk of 'objectification' is anathema.

The rise and rise of "management", its constant, chameleon self-reinvention has muddied many waters. Many new meanings seem to grow from the bureaucratisation of society through code, a restless tendency toward make-work, anthropomorphism and even deification. The "cloud" is more than a mere model for computing infrastructure. At the very least I think its a political idea.