4 ms·

Opt out means devs get crappy data. Only way for software to improve is to get usage data. Would you rather be stuck with crappy software dictated by the need

by nojito 6y ago

Opt out means devs get crappy data. Only way for software to improve is to get usage data. Would you rather be stuck with crappy software dictated by the needs and wants by the minority?

thelittleone 6y ago
Apps in the 90s didn't have user data. I was approximately as productive on apps from the 90s as I am in modern apps today. I am more frequently frustrated by modern apps.
- vxNsr 6y ago
  I think this is something we need to study somehow even if it feels very true. I often find myself wondering why they’ve made something worse than it was a few years ago. Many parts of iOS and windows 10 have degraded from what they were.
  - thelittleone 6y ago
    I agree totally. It could also be that user data is being used to make more profitable products not necessarily better products for the users.
    - vxNsr 6y ago
      This rings true. We have experts in funneling people to open their wallets but a dearth of ppl who are good at delighting, unless they see it as a way to make you open your wallet.
- baddox 6y ago
  Were you as productive then? I don’t know what kind of work you do, but I recently put together a website with a map displaying some public data around Covid-19. That website can be viewed in seconds by essentially anyone on a 3g or better internet connection by nearly any computer or smartphone released in the last 5 years. I can’t imagine I would be able to delivery even the basic mapping and data visualization features in the 1990s in the same time frame, and it certainly wouldn’t have the ease of distribution.
  - pedrogpimenta 6y ago
    ... what? So people weren't productive before computers? What does your story have to do with being productive or with productivity between now and the 90s or the tools you used?
    - baddox 6y ago
      Yes, people were vastly less productive at a huge number of tasks before computers. Tools and machines make people more productive. I’m very confused that this seems to be controversial. I suspect there is some unstated definition of “productivity” at play here that I am unfamiliar with.
      - pedrogpimenta 6y ago
        It's not controversial, you're talking about a tangential subject. Your example has nothing to do with being productive, just that there are much more tools available now. Your example couldn't even be possible in the 90s and you're not saying anything about text editors.
- nailer 6y ago
  Really? I remember apps in the nineties with simple bugs that didn't get fixed for /years/. That sometimes happens now, but nowhere near as much.
yjftsjthsd-h 6y ago
> Only way for software to improve is to get usage data. That's a bold claim. Why not make something that works for the dev and then take user feedback into consideration?
- Jonnax 6y ago
  I think it's easy to argue that your loudest users aren't a representative sample.
  - Silhouette 6y ago
    That is true, but it is also easy to argue that the users who voluntarily consent to sending telemetry, or who don't block "mandatory" telemetry using methods beyond the developer's control, aren't a representative sample either. For example, in what should have been a surprise to no-one, it turned out that "power users" who spend a lot of time with a certain application and heavily customise its UI for their needs were also more likely to change default telemetry options to turn things off. Similarly, systems at work that are managed by specialist staff in large organisations tend to be more tightly locked down than what you find in a small office where Bob sets things up for the new starters when he has a couple of hours free from his usual job. Consequently, when certain big-name software developers redesigned their whole UI, proudly declaring that the new version would be more effective because it was based on what their objective telemetry data had told them about how the application was used, power users instead found the new UI confusing and inefficient. There is always some resistance to change in these situations, but when you have a significant and influential part of your market still not upgrading to your newer products years later and citing the UI as one of their reasons, you've probably made a mistake on that one.
    - ulisesrmzroche 6y ago
      Wheres the proof that yak shavers are power users?
      - yjftsjthsd-h 6y ago
T3RMINATED 6y ago
just look at sublime, it hasnt improved in a decade.
millimeterman 6y ago
The fact that this is unpopular convinces me that most HN posters don't work on real commercial products. Or if they do, then I don't care to use the products they develop.

by nojito 6y ago

Opt out means devs get crappy data. Only way for software to improve is to get usage data. Would you rather be stuck with crappy software dictated by the needs and wants by the minority?

thelittleone 6y ago

Apps in the 90s didn't have user data. I was approximately as productive on apps from the 90s as I am in modern apps today. I am more frequently frustrated by modern apps.

vxNsr 6y ago
I think this is something we need to study somehow even if it feels very true. I often find myself wondering why they’ve made something worse than it was a few years ago. Many parts of iOS and windows 10 have degraded from what they were.
- thelittleone 6y ago
  I agree totally. It could also be that user data is being used to make more profitable products not necessarily better products for the users.
  - vxNsr 6y ago
    This rings true. We have experts in funneling people to open their wallets but a dearth of ppl who are good at delighting, unless they see it as a way to make you open your wallet.
baddox 6y ago
Were you as productive then? I don’t know what kind of work you do, but I recently put together a website with a map displaying some public data around Covid-19. That website can be viewed in seconds by essentially anyone on a 3g or better internet connection by nearly any computer or smartphone released in the last 5 years. I can’t imagine I would be able to delivery even the basic mapping and data visualization features in the 1990s in the same time frame, and it certainly wouldn’t have the ease of distribution.
- pedrogpimenta 6y ago
  ... what? So people weren't productive before computers? What does your story have to do with being productive or with productivity between now and the 90s or the tools you used?
  - baddox 6y ago
    Yes, people were vastly less productive at a huge number of tasks before computers. Tools and machines make people more productive. I’m very confused that this seems to be controversial. I suspect there is some unstated definition of “productivity” at play here that I am unfamiliar with.
    - pedrogpimenta 6y ago
      It's not controversial, you're talking about a tangential subject. Your example has nothing to do with being productive, just that there are much more tools available now. Your example couldn't even be possible in the 90s and you're not saying anything about text editors.
nailer 6y ago
Really? I remember apps in the nineties with simple bugs that didn't get fixed for /years/. That sometimes happens now, but nowhere near as much.

yjftsjthsd-h 6y ago

> Only way for software to improve is to get usage data. That's a bold claim. Why not make something that works for the dev and then take user feedback into consideration?

Jonnax 6y ago
I think it's easy to argue that your loudest users aren't a representative sample.
- Silhouette 6y ago
  That is true, but it is also easy to argue that the users who voluntarily consent to sending telemetry, or who don't block "mandatory" telemetry using methods beyond the developer's control, aren't a representative sample either. For example, in what should have been a surprise to no-one, it turned out that "power users" who spend a lot of time with a certain application and heavily customise its UI for their needs were also more likely to change default telemetry options to turn things off. Similarly, systems at work that are managed by specialist staff in large organisations tend to be more tightly locked down than what you find in a small office where Bob sets things up for the new starters when he has a couple of hours free from his usual job. Consequently, when certain big-name software developers redesigned their whole UI, proudly declaring that the new version would be more effective because it was based on what their objective telemetry data had told them about how the application was used, power users instead found the new UI confusing and inefficient. There is always some resistance to change in these situations, but when you have a significant and influential part of your market still not upgrading to your newer products years later and citing the UI as one of their reasons, you've probably made a mistake on that one.
  - ulisesrmzroche 6y ago
    Wheres the proof that yak shavers are power users?
    - yjftsjthsd-h 6y ago

T3RMINATED 6y ago

just look at sublime, it hasnt improved in a decade.

millimeterman 6y ago

The fact that this is unpopular convinces me that most HN posters don't work on real commercial products. Or if they do, then I don't care to use the products they develop.