>Don't be condescending Where was I condescending? I gave good answers to all your points. >This app crashes so much, it must be some really obvious exception

>Don't be condescending Where was I condescending? I gave good answers to all your points. >This app crashes so much, it must be some really obvious exception they're not catching. Who's condescending now? "Since it breaks so much, sheesh, it should be really obvious how to fix it." Nothing is really obvious how to fix, if they knew how to fix it they already wood have >I don't expect it to be bug free, but constantly crashing? Since you're obviously such a pro, let me ask you: Would you release software that crashes so often? Inferiority complex much? I never said I was a pro. And releasing an obviously buggy product sometimes is tied to contractual agreements or marketing deals. Once you start a marketing blitz, you _need_to release something. Engineering is subordinate to actually, you know, making money. >Apple doesn't have contigencies for top-tier developers and emergency updates? Huh. Not for "top tier developers". Also emergency updates are generally only relate to when there are security or privacy concerns. Crashing doesn't bother them much, if it made it through their initial vetting process. >Caching is a famously hard problem, but wiping the entire state and starting again for basic information that doesn't change is sloppy. Deltas and common sense helps here. Same thing for use of GPS and data. You said yourself that the app is really buggy, and then you also want to introduce a level of caching on top of it? That will make it even buggier and harder to diagnose. >So many people affected for no good reason. Which lays credence to the fact that Niantic made the right balance between buggy software and shipping. Not many people would be affected if the game weren't popular despite its bugs and limitations, so shipping at this stage seems like the proper thing to do.