4 ms·

IMO these walled-garden app stores that are supposed to be "so good for the users" should require quality release notes that describe the exact "performance imp

dudus 6y ago
I'm on the other end of the spectrum. Since the updates are constant, often required and automatic it makes little sense to provide these in the store itself. The user doesn't really have a choice of not updating most of the time. It's not a decision they should make I'd rather see release notes outside the stores, for more technically inclined users only.
iso8859-1 6y ago
Users would be scared by reading technically accurate release notes. So for apps as ubiquitous as WhatsApp, it makes sense to have two kinds of release notes, one for techies, and one for commoners, who only want to know whether features were added or not.
- Sosh101 6y ago
  That's so patronising.
  - iso8859-1 6y ago
    If it was sufficiently patronizing, users would be offended and WhatsApp would not be popular. Therefore it cannot be as patronizing as you claim.
    - bitten 6y ago
      so if a tree falls in the woods and nobody is around to hear it.. it didn't make a sound? ;)
    - ssss11 6y ago
      That sounds logical in theory but in practice users may use a tool and still loathe it. Their choice to use WhatsApp is partially dependent on their contacts’ choice to use it.
  - kinkrtyavimoodh 6y ago
    It's way less patronizing than the policies of the App Store.
- ColanR 6y ago
  Having dealt with my share of technically-unsavvy users, I can confirm that half the job is managing their feelings. The other half is working around them to keep things safe and functional in spite of them.
- amatecha 6y ago
  Disagree 100%. I don't expect technical detail, I expect product change detail. Have you ever looked at Slack's release notes? Easily digestible and they don't need to go into deep technical detail to say that a given feature behaves slightly differently now. I expect a bit more than the totally-meaningless "bug fixes". Even something as simple as "icon update, old messages now stored in Archive tab". I just don't want crazy surprises like a total UI overhaul where tons of stuff I'm used to is just suddenly gone.
ffggvv 6y ago
apple actually banned update descriptions like that a few years ago. when they announced it they started enforcing it but i goes over time they’ve gotten lax or just give big companies exceptions
- tinus_hn 6y ago
  Apple is going to have a hard time enforcing this when 90% of their own updates are described as ‘bug fixes and performance improvements’
  - amatecha 6y ago
    I've collected screenshots of app updates with that text as their release notes so I can one day start a "bug fixes and performance improvements" tumblr or blog or the like. It's just such a joke to me. Kinda like software installers that put the GNU Public License as their license agreement you have to agree to before installing, haha
reaperducer 6y ago
IMO these walled-garden app stores that are supposed to be "so good for the users" should require quality release notes that describe the exact "performance improvements and bug fixes" that the respective apps apparently receive. What is it that makes you think this is caused by "walled gardens?" Do you have a link to a policy that requires this, or is it your own biases showing through?
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
- Shared404 6y ago
  They are stating that if the walled garden is supposed to benefit users by curating, they should be curating. In this case, they should be curating patch notes.
- amatecha 6y ago
  I think you may have misunderstood my comment... I'm saying that if the walled garden app stores are supposed to be good for users (especially if this is one of their marketing bullet points), one might reasonably expect that "high-detail release notes" ought to be one of the requirements for app developers, imposed by the owner of the app store (Apple, Google, etc.) .. This way users get a good understanding of what changes will happen when they download an update of a given app.
2xlbuds 6y ago
There are quite a few reasons to have release notes like this: 1. Major apps often do phased rollouts of features in order to react to potential production issues, or to make certain features available to a limited subset of users or regions without having to do an emergency binary release if things go wrong. 2. The new build contains an A/B experiment, and you don't want to tell users that feature X was revamped because the experiment might not even go anywhere and only a small number of users will see it, anyways. 3. Your app is stable enough to have a regular release cadence e.g. monthly or biweekly, and you actually are just shipping whatever bugfixes made it into master since the last release with the major feature changes hidden behind feature flags until they are ready for 1. or 2. 4. The vast, vast, majority of users never read the update notes on the app store. They have automatic updates enabled, and your app updates at 3AM when their phone is plugged in on wifi and they are fast asleep. 5. Building on 4, if you actually want to advertise new features to users, it is better to build a native experience into the app either building a UI highlighting what has changed in the new version, or just popping up a dialog to show the patch notes (can be coupled with 1. and 2. to only show the dialog to users who have gotten the new feature enabled in the phased rollout or experiment). Discord is an example of an app that does this well. 6. Also building on 4., the changes are so minor that they are not worth paying a translation service to translate your patch notes if you are offering your app in multiple languages.
- crpatino 6y ago
  1. If I buy a car, I expect to get the actual car I ordered, not the experimental model they will be offering next year. You could argue customers are not paying for the software anyways... but I suspect that is not always the case. 2. IF I wanted to go into a focus group, I would go there, and expect to be somehow rewarded for my troubles. I certainly would not tolerate marketeers slithering into my house at night, change things at random, and then spy on my to see how I react. 3. I'd still want to know what those fixes are. 4. The vast majority of users do not read the fine print either. That does not change the fact that banks are not allowed to change your mortgage terms and falsify your signature into the new contract. 5. It is NOT best for a IRL utility provider to promptly notify you when the terms of service have changed, it is MANDATORY UNDER THE LAW. 6. You could publish the change log in English, and each customer would decide whether they wanted to translate those or not, and how much would they pay for the translation. All in all, Silicon Valley still does not care about its customers. You will not be hearing about it in the news because it has always been like that.
1vuio0pswjnm7 6y ago
I would prefer an "app store" that required apps to be open source. This would allow everyone to see exactly what is being done by the developers. Release notes alone are not of much use for the public in the case of closed source apps because the public cannot take a closer look. Is anyone really going to look at a release note that says "Bug fixes" and make a qualitative decision on the app? With lots of such notes we could conclude the developers are busy fixing things (good) however we could also conclude the app when released contained many latent bugs (bad). But we need to see the source changes to truly understand what are the circumstances. Perhaps such vague release notes are not actually published for the benefit of users but for some other reason(s).

dudus 6y ago

I'm on the other end of the spectrum. Since the updates are constant, often required and automatic it makes little sense to provide these in the store itself. The user doesn't really have a choice of not updating most of the time. It's not a decision they should make I'd rather see release notes outside the stores, for more technically inclined users only.

iso8859-1 6y ago

Users would be scared by reading technically accurate release notes. So for apps as ubiquitous as WhatsApp, it makes sense to have two kinds of release notes, one for techies, and one for commoners, who only want to know whether features were added or not.

Sosh101 6y ago
That's so patronising.
- iso8859-1 6y ago
  If it was sufficiently patronizing, users would be offended and WhatsApp would not be popular. Therefore it cannot be as patronizing as you claim.
  - bitten 6y ago
    so if a tree falls in the woods and nobody is around to hear it.. it didn't make a sound? ;)
  - ssss11 6y ago
    That sounds logical in theory but in practice users may use a tool and still loathe it. Their choice to use WhatsApp is partially dependent on their contacts’ choice to use it.
- kinkrtyavimoodh 6y ago
  It's way less patronizing than the policies of the App Store.
ColanR 6y ago
Having dealt with my share of technically-unsavvy users, I can confirm that half the job is managing their feelings. The other half is working around them to keep things safe and functional in spite of them.
amatecha 6y ago
Disagree 100%. I don't expect technical detail, I expect product change detail. Have you ever looked at Slack's release notes? Easily digestible and they don't need to go into deep technical detail to say that a given feature behaves slightly differently now. I expect a bit more than the totally-meaningless "bug fixes". Even something as simple as "icon update, old messages now stored in Archive tab". I just don't want crazy surprises like a total UI overhaul where tons of stuff I'm used to is just suddenly gone.

ffggvv 6y ago

apple actually banned update descriptions like that a few years ago. when they announced it they started enforcing it but i goes over time they’ve gotten lax or just give big companies exceptions

tinus_hn 6y ago
Apple is going to have a hard time enforcing this when 90% of their own updates are described as ‘bug fixes and performance improvements’
- amatecha 6y ago
  I've collected screenshots of app updates with that text as their release notes so I can one day start a "bug fixes and performance improvements" tumblr or blog or the like. It's just such a joke to me. Kinda like software installers that put the GNU Public License as their license agreement you have to agree to before installing, haha

reaperducer 6y ago

IMO these walled-garden app stores that are supposed to be "so good for the users" should require quality release notes that describe the exact "performance improvements and bug fixes" that the respective apps apparently receive. What is it that makes you think this is caused by "walled gardens?" Do you have a link to a policy that requires this, or is it your own biases showing through?

deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
Shared404 6y ago
They are stating that if the walled garden is supposed to benefit users by curating, they should be curating. In this case, they should be curating patch notes.
amatecha 6y ago
I think you may have misunderstood my comment... I'm saying that if the walled garden app stores are supposed to be good for users (especially if this is one of their marketing bullet points), one might reasonably expect that "high-detail release notes" ought to be one of the requirements for app developers, imposed by the owner of the app store (Apple, Google, etc.) .. This way users get a good understanding of what changes will happen when they download an update of a given app.

2xlbuds 6y ago

There are quite a few reasons to have release notes like this: 1. Major apps often do phased rollouts of features in order to react to potential production issues, or to make certain features available to a limited subset of users or regions without having to do an emergency binary release if things go wrong. 2. The new build contains an A/B experiment, and you don't want to tell users that feature X was revamped because the experiment might not even go anywhere and only a small number of users will see it, anyways. 3. Your app is stable enough to have a regular release cadence e.g. monthly or biweekly, and you actually are just shipping whatever bugfixes made it into master since the last release with the major feature changes hidden behind feature flags until they are ready for 1. or 2. 4. The vast, vast, majority of users never read the update notes on the app store. They have automatic updates enabled, and your app updates at 3AM when their phone is plugged in on wifi and they are fast asleep. 5. Building on 4, if you actually want to advertise new features to users, it is better to build a native experience into the app either building a UI highlighting what has changed in the new version, or just popping up a dialog to show the patch notes (can be coupled with 1. and 2. to only show the dialog to users who have gotten the new feature enabled in the phased rollout or experiment). Discord is an example of an app that does this well. 6. Also building on 4., the changes are so minor that they are not worth paying a translation service to translate your patch notes if you are offering your app in multiple languages.

crpatino 6y ago
1. If I buy a car, I expect to get the actual car I ordered, not the experimental model they will be offering next year. You could argue customers are not paying for the software anyways... but I suspect that is not always the case. 2. IF I wanted to go into a focus group, I would go there, and expect to be somehow rewarded for my troubles. I certainly would not tolerate marketeers slithering into my house at night, change things at random, and then spy on my to see how I react. 3. I'd still want to know what those fixes are. 4. The vast majority of users do not read the fine print either. That does not change the fact that banks are not allowed to change your mortgage terms and falsify your signature into the new contract. 5. It is NOT best for a IRL utility provider to promptly notify you when the terms of service have changed, it is MANDATORY UNDER THE LAW. 6. You could publish the change log in English, and each customer would decide whether they wanted to translate those or not, and how much would they pay for the translation. All in all, Silicon Valley still does not care about its customers. You will not be hearing about it in the news because it has always been like that.

1vuio0pswjnm7 6y ago

I would prefer an "app store" that required apps to be open source. This would allow everyone to see exactly what is being done by the developers. Release notes alone are not of much use for the public in the case of closed source apps because the public cannot take a closer look. Is anyone really going to look at a release note that says "Bug fixes" and make a qualitative decision on the app? With lots of such notes we could conclude the developers are busy fixing things (good) however we could also conclude the app when released contained many latent bugs (bad). But we need to see the source changes to truly understand what are the circumstances. Perhaps such vague release notes are not actually published for the benefit of users but for some other reason(s).