3 ms·
In the past (when I was still a solo developer), after being 90% confident the code won't completely break the environment or do something screwy with user data
by jermaustin1 8y ago
In the past (when I was still a solo developer), after being 90% confident the code won't completely break the environment or do something screwy with user data, sticking the code in production and funneling 50% of the requests to it while watching NewRelic.
There are no better user testers than your users, and the risk is only moderate. I could always pull the server down and restore the previous version while trying to fix whatever I broke in the deployment.
But if you aren't doing SaaS, user testing as a solo developer is not really feasible. The best user testing I can think of that doesn't "cost" is a Beta/RC Program for your users to volunteer to get potentially broke software for a discount or just early feature releases. For this to work though, you have to have enough users.
- rhardih 8y agoI agree, it's easier to do for web apps since you don't have to contend with "app store reviews", that can potentially leave a lasting blemish on your product. So far I've done it as you describe as well and it's the "getting enough users" part that's a pickle. If you get X users on to sign up for a beta, only a fraction of those will actually ever install the app and give it a spin and again, only a fraction of those will give you any real feedback to work from. Finding real testers without breaking the budget, of your (maybe zero-profit) app is the challenge.
- jermaustin1 8y agoI've never trusted a user to provide feedback. They will complain if something if it's terribly broken, but not if it's still usable. That's why I have always used a 3rd party system to collect actual usage analytics combined with server logs.