3 ms·
That's a pretty gratuitous assumption that you're making. And I don't see what the "good reason" is. Let's face it, they just dropped a feature that people were
by Wilya 14y ago
That's a pretty gratuitous assumption that you're making. And I don't see what the "good reason" is. Let's face it, they just dropped a feature that people were using, without clear upgrade path. Few people were using it ? Maybe. That doesn't make it a good decision, only (at best) a sad but necessary compromise.
Frankly, a feed reader that is already there, and works, needs next to zero maintenance. It's not like RSS format changes everyday.
- mullr 14y agoBut a feed reader inside another program that IS changing does indeed require maintenance. Even just testing to make sure it still works isn't free. It also adds complexity to the user interface.
- sonnenkiste 14y agoTo remove something is ok. But you should clearly inform the user and give him the possibility to easy get his data back and really cool would be to provide a solution for the now existing problem. Maybe to point him to an App Download. Just dropping a feature without any response is bad practice.
- prodigal_erik 14y agoIf they didn't test it, it might have broken. That outcome is still better than what happened, where they ensured it became completely unusable.