4 ms·

> I know this is the popular conclusion - but from a developer perspective, data such as what software your product is used with is INCREDIBLY valuable for proj

by vageli 7y ago

> I know this is the popular conclusion - but from a developer perspective, data such as what software your product is used with is INCREDIBLY valuable for project planning and prioritization. People hate web tracking, but knowing what browsers or devices are visiting your website can be enormously helpful. What happened to actually communicating with users to learn more about how they use the product?

Kalium 7y ago
That assumes a great deal about both the resources available to do it and the ability to get responses from a representative sample of customers. It's not challenging to see why someone might choose a one-time cost in software engineering over an ongoing cost in communication.
- adamc 7y ago
  It's not challenging, but it's wrong. If you want to explain it to them, making a binding promise of what it would be used for, and have it be opt-in, that would be another thing. It's not hard to see how to do it right.
  - Kalium 7y ago
    Morally and ethically, you're absolutely correct in every single possible way. I was attempting to illustrate the decision-making processes that may have led to this juncture and what happened to communicating with customers. Please accept my apologies, as I have plainly failed to be clear that this was not an argument as to the moral or ethical questions concerned. Again, you're completely right. It's not at all difficult to see the morally and ethically correct way to go about this.
- a_e_k 7y ago
  I really like the approach that the Steam survey uses which blends engineering and communication: 1) Pop up and ask for permission to scan the machine. 2) Show the data collected that will be sent back and give a second chance to decline. 3) Allow everyone to see the aggregate results. Being mostly automated, it's lower friction than a manual Q&A survey. But it also feels way more respectful that trying to snoop around and then clandestinely exfiltrate the data. It's one of the few cases where I'm willing to opt-in to data collection.
  - nerdponx 7y ago
    This. You aren't asking for vague blanket permission, nor are you asking for the user to manually fill out a survey. And you give them the opportunity to review what they're about to send.
  - IggleSniggle 7y ago
    Great point! And being able to see the results in aggregate is also interesting. It inclines me to share, because it becomes a two-way share, even though I don't actually have use for the information.
    - penagwin 7y ago
      Being able to see the aggregate data isn't just interesting but publicly helpful. From a game developer perspective, looking at it right now tells me that (simplified): * Most gamers have at least a GTX 1050 and 8GB of ram or higher. Perfect now we know where to aim our medium settings. * 74% use Nvidia GPUs, 15% use AMD - now we know where to focus driver optimizations * English, Simplified Chinese, and Russian are the top languages (where to focus translations) * 72% play on 1080p, 14% on 1440p, etc. Tells us what resolutions to make sure our UI works on.
moron4hire 7y ago
Users stopped communicating. They install a thing, they uninstall it. 99% don't leave any comment at all. (and yes, the obverse inference is also true. If you see one person complaining, there are probably 99 more who have had the same issue and have said nothing)
- heavyset_go 7y ago
  That's not an excuse, but a reason to pay for a focus group or study.
WrtCdEvrydy 7y ago
Slashed in pursuit of VC money and profits.
- Kalium 7y ago
  Wacom's a public company. There's a lot of things they might be chasing, but VC money seems unlikely to be high on that list.
jasonlotito 7y ago
> What happened to actually communicating with users to learn more about how they use the product? https://www.nngroup.com/articles/first-rule-of-usability-dont-listen-to-users/ https://www.nngroup.com/articles/first-rule-of-usability-don... "watch users as they attempt to perform tasks"
duxup 7y ago
Like a survey? I'm not sure the information would be all that accurate. If you want to put resources into "hey folks like to use this product with ours" you need accurate information.
- heavyset_go 7y ago
  Do what companies have always done: pay for user studies and focus groups.
  - duxup 7y ago
    Big companies maybe.
jyrkesh 7y ago
It's a confirmation bias problem. Customers who fill out surveys and give direct feedback back to vendors are frequently lower-usage enthusiasts that aren't representative of your overall userbase. I work on a product, and we include some telemetry. I'm also a strong privacy advocate, and I believe I've done my best within the corporate realm to ensure that the data we're collecting is extremely scoped AND useful for decision making and prioritization. In my experience, there aren't that many of me, but I implore folks to realize that as PMs and engineers, we absolutely do have a say in making sure that blanket data exfiltration and aggregation doesn't happen in our products. Communicating with your customers proactively about what you're collecting and why is important too. And not buried in some privacy policy legalese: publish a blog post, explain what you're gathering, give examples of how it's driven decision-making for you in the past, and what you're hoping to learn in the future. It goes a long way.
- fl0wenol 7y ago
  As a user, even if you're up about these things and why they're important for product development, my answer is still "No." Because I will only say "Yes" if I'm being paid or otherwise compensated specifically for that input. I think it's important companies pay for usage testing so that they value that information and are more likely to hold it closely since it represents an investment and is perceived as competitive advantage.
  - Piskvorrr 7y ago
    That's why a sane data collection is aggreggate, upfront about the data it collects, avoidable, and most of all, explicitly opt-in. Alas, this requires eternal vigilance, as the pushback is neverending.

by vageli 7y ago

Kalium 7y ago

That assumes a great deal about both the resources available to do it and the ability to get responses from a representative sample of customers. It's not challenging to see why someone might choose a one-time cost in software engineering over an ongoing cost in communication.

adamc 7y ago
It's not challenging, but it's wrong. If you want to explain it to them, making a binding promise of what it would be used for, and have it be opt-in, that would be another thing. It's not hard to see how to do it right.
- Kalium 7y ago
  Morally and ethically, you're absolutely correct in every single possible way. I was attempting to illustrate the decision-making processes that may have led to this juncture and what happened to communicating with customers. Please accept my apologies, as I have plainly failed to be clear that this was not an argument as to the moral or ethical questions concerned. Again, you're completely right. It's not at all difficult to see the morally and ethically correct way to go about this.
a_e_k 7y ago
I really like the approach that the Steam survey uses which blends engineering and communication: 1) Pop up and ask for permission to scan the machine. 2) Show the data collected that will be sent back and give a second chance to decline. 3) Allow everyone to see the aggregate results. Being mostly automated, it's lower friction than a manual Q&A survey. But it also feels way more respectful that trying to snoop around and then clandestinely exfiltrate the data. It's one of the few cases where I'm willing to opt-in to data collection.
- nerdponx 7y ago
  This. You aren't asking for vague blanket permission, nor are you asking for the user to manually fill out a survey. And you give them the opportunity to review what they're about to send.
- IggleSniggle 7y ago
  Great point! And being able to see the results in aggregate is also interesting. It inclines me to share, because it becomes a two-way share, even though I don't actually have use for the information.
  - penagwin 7y ago
    Being able to see the aggregate data isn't just interesting but publicly helpful. From a game developer perspective, looking at it right now tells me that (simplified): * Most gamers have at least a GTX 1050 and 8GB of ram or higher. Perfect now we know where to aim our medium settings. * 74% use Nvidia GPUs, 15% use AMD - now we know where to focus driver optimizations * English, Simplified Chinese, and Russian are the top languages (where to focus translations) * 72% play on 1080p, 14% on 1440p, etc. Tells us what resolutions to make sure our UI works on.

moron4hire 7y ago

Users stopped communicating. They install a thing, they uninstall it. 99% don't leave any comment at all. (and yes, the obverse inference is also true. If you see one person complaining, there are probably 99 more who have had the same issue and have said nothing)

heavyset_go 7y ago
That's not an excuse, but a reason to pay for a focus group or study.

WrtCdEvrydy 7y ago

Slashed in pursuit of VC money and profits.

Kalium 7y ago
Wacom's a public company. There's a lot of things they might be chasing, but VC money seems unlikely to be high on that list.

jasonlotito 7y ago

> What happened to actually communicating with users to learn more about how they use the product? https://www.nngroup.com/articles/first-rule-of-usability-dont-listen-to-users/ https://www.nngroup.com/articles/first-rule-of-usability-don... "watch users as they attempt to perform tasks"

duxup 7y ago

Like a survey? I'm not sure the information would be all that accurate. If you want to put resources into "hey folks like to use this product with ours" you need accurate information.

heavyset_go 7y ago
Do what companies have always done: pay for user studies and focus groups.
- duxup 7y ago
  Big companies maybe.

jyrkesh 7y ago

It's a confirmation bias problem. Customers who fill out surveys and give direct feedback back to vendors are frequently lower-usage enthusiasts that aren't representative of your overall userbase. I work on a product, and we include some telemetry. I'm also a strong privacy advocate, and I believe I've done my best within the corporate realm to ensure that the data we're collecting is extremely scoped AND useful for decision making and prioritization. In my experience, there aren't that many of me, but I implore folks to realize that as PMs and engineers, we absolutely do have a say in making sure that blanket data exfiltration and aggregation doesn't happen in our products. Communicating with your customers proactively about what you're collecting and why is important too. And not buried in some privacy policy legalese: publish a blog post, explain what you're gathering, give examples of how it's driven decision-making for you in the past, and what you're hoping to learn in the future. It goes a long way.

fl0wenol 7y ago
As a user, even if you're up about these things and why they're important for product development, my answer is still "No." Because I will only say "Yes" if I'm being paid or otherwise compensated specifically for that input. I think it's important companies pay for usage testing so that they value that information and are more likely to hold it closely since it represents an investment and is perceived as competitive advantage.
- Piskvorrr 7y ago
  That's why a sane data collection is aggreggate, upfront about the data it collects, avoidable, and most of all, explicitly opt-in. Alas, this requires eternal vigilance, as the pushback is neverending.