7 ms·
Actually I find its broken down into two camps: Consumers want the latest. Companies want the most stable. After some particularly huge disasters I've had to
by csmuk 13y ago
Actually I find its broken down into two camps:
Consumers want the latest.
Companies want the most stable.
After some particularly huge disasters I've had to deal with coming onto new projects and with general consumer electronics, I'd go for the latter every time both as a consumer and company these days. Time is valuable and losing it to a feature packed unreliable mess is a big risk to that time.
- blowski 13y agoYou're right - there is a tradeoff between features and stability, but "consumers vs companies" is an oversimplification. It's about the probability of something breaking, and the consequences of what happens when it does. For a company with a large workforce, the probability of something breaking is higher - many different machines being used in different ways, and the cost of a botched upgrade can run into millions, with people losing their jobs, and legal action being taken. For consumers, the risk is typically lower and less costly if it goes wrong. If a Facebook upgrade causes the app to crash repeatedly, it means I can't post for a while, so I'll just upgrade and hope for the best. But if a personal finance or medical app goes wrong the consequences could be extremely serious, so stability is more important.