4 ms·
> Select a random portion of your userbase and ask them. This sounds great in theory - harder to do in practice. Often what ends up happening is the only peopl
by mbesto 6y ago
> Select a random portion of your userbase and ask them.
This sounds great in theory - harder to do in practice. Often what ends up happening is the only people who will share their time with you are the ones who want something specifically changed for them. Thus my point, it's effective, but it's not a silver bullet.
> I've built and supported software with 80k end users and did that effectively single-handedly.
And plenty of businesses have used Google Analytics, Mixpanel, etc. combined with the aforementioned technique.
TL;DR - The two strategies are not mutually exclusive.
- wtetzner 6y ago> This sounds great in theory - harder to do in practice. Sure, but lots of things are hard. That doesn't mean we should all be happy about software phoning home without the consent of the user.
- TeMPOraL 6y agoProblem is, the latter strategy is rarely used (telemetry is cheaper!), and as far as I can see the consequences, telemetry data is hard to use correctly. In particular, it's prone to become a mirror of your design, creating a feedback loop. Telemetry will show people will use more of the things you've exposed more, and less of the things you've exposed less, so if you take that at face value, then you're just amplifying your own initial design bias.
- reaperducer 6y agoThis sounds great in theory - harder to do in practice And therein lies the root of "telemetry" — the SV bubble's lack of interest, lack of effort, and fear of interfacing with the wetware. Telemetry is easy. Talking to people is hard. Too bad.