Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Users hate change

gist.github.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

181–190 of 315 posts

Re: Users hate change

#181

Post by causalmodels »

johnday wrote: post #100
TeMPOraL wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Facebook's UI has changed significantly over the last 15 or so years. Features have appeared and disappeared, boxes have been arranged and rearranged. But there's rarely a big fuss beyond it getting a little slower each time (roughly commensurate with consumer hardware speedup, in fact). People don't really notice and they don't really care. Are you using the same Facebook as I do? Every time they rearranged more t…

I guess that's a side effect of the siloing that goes on on Facebook. I certainly heard nothing major about it, and orders of magnitude less than the same/similar people about the Twitter redesigns.

That's because media people cannot do their jobs without Twitter. Since they have the megaphone, everyone hears about their gripes.

Re: Users hate change

#182

Post by ryandrake »

mgfist wrote: post #164
grincho wrote: post #135

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Then charge for bug fixes. Charge for updates that make the application run on a new version of the OS. If those things provide sufficient value, users will pay for them. I've been paying for that for decades for my commercial text editor. And can subscriptions be canceled in practice? If you cancel your Photoshop subscription, your documents suddenly become unopenable. In this way, software subscriptions—at least fo…

How would you sell bug fixes? "Hi grincho, how would you like an update for X feature where we fix Y bugs for Z dollars?" Most people would respond by asking why they have to pay more money for things that should be working in the first place. It'll become hard to know whether a developer is fixing new bugs or whether they just wrote some buggy software knowing they'll get more money by selling bug fixes separately r…

Right. I should not have to pay again, or subscribe to some “service” to have the company fix their product’s defects. If I buy a vacuum cleaner that randomly rips up my carpet once every 100 sessions, or a garage door that opens by itself in the middle of the night, I should not have to pay the companies to fix them. This is why we have warranties and product recalls, which are conspicuously absent in the software business.

Re: Users hate change

#183

Post by la_barba »

mehrdadn wrote: post #175
la_barba wrote: post #172

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As a consumer, you are free to engage with a business of your choice. Likewise, a business is free to adopt a business model of their choice. That is the only "logic" at play here.

> As a consumer, you are free to engage with a business of your choice. Likewise, a business is free to adopt a business model of their choice. That is the only "logic" at play here. So the logic behind "this model is objectively bad and means life or death for a company" was "well, it's a free country, so if you don't like it, go somewhere else" ?

What I said was much milder - "A lot of small companies that were selling shrink-wrapped software have shuttered down - for various reasons no doubt, but the effect of a steady revenue stream on any business cannot be dismissed"

Specifically, I did not say that the subscription model is the only way to make money or stay in business. You're needlessly polarizing the issue and at this point, I'm gonna have to set the troll flag on you, and this conversation has stopped being productive. Bye.

Re: Users hate change

#185

Post by elboru »

redbeard0x0a wrote: post #51
_nalply wrote: post #17

My wife has handicaps (deaf and cerebral palsy). She gets nervous and mistrustful if something has changed. She hates updates and asked me why the companies can't let the software alone. She has a point. Updates and nagging dialogs have a cost which is higher for non-IT people. Imagine your old neighbor being confused if he should allow that update or not and being stressed about because these update requests don't s…

The best analogy of finished software I have heard is this: > Software is done, like mowing the lawn is done. We live in an imperfect world, if we want to keep ourselves safe and prevent bad actors out of our data/technology. Updates are a part of the process. You don't mow your lawn once, it has to be maintained. Which is the same as software. This is something that we would be all better for if we could teach this…

Why couldn’t it be more like hardware, if it’s well built I won’t need an electrician to come every week or two to update the hardware. I think that can be true for software too, at least updates shouldn’t be intrusive (chrome and HN come to mind)

Let me give you an example, I’m a casual gamer, I don’t play every day, sometimes a week or two could pass without me playing with my console, but almost every single time I turn it on it will get at least one update, for the console itself, my controller, the game I wanted to play, I guess that’s one of the reasons I don’t turn my console that often. I miss the old days when my NES would wait for me, he was always ready!

Re: Users hate change

#186

Post by reroute1 »

pwinnski wrote: post #113
reroute1 wrote: post #112

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is that really a problem? Couldn't you calculate an average across users and us that as the peak measurement instead.

Yes, it's really a problem. An average fails to be the peak version for anyone , missing some features wanted by some users, and having too many features for other users.

That's not necessarily true. An average could also be the peak version for many users. And if it is true, I still don't see why it's a problem, the average would still measure the peak state across all users?

Re: Users hate change

#187

Post by stcredzero »

Firstly: humans don't resist change when it's something that they asked for, they resist things being imposed upon them against their will. There is an incredibly persistent cultural movement in product design that "we know best", this is a very parent-child style relationship: "Mother knows best", that both disempowers and disengages customers.

Yes, yes, yes! A thousand times Yes!

Here's the right way to do a UI revamp: Introduce your powerful, better, shiny new UI as a clone of the old UI. Once the clone is of high fidelity, then introduce the ability to switch to new "skins" or new "modes" which have the new powerful features, or the better UX. Perhaps even set up a scenario with 2 or more competing to win new users.

The proper way is to let users discover and move to the new thing. Imposing new UI/UX on users just degrades goodwill, and it also hides data about where the new version has flaws or needs improvement. Adopting change needs to be a "pull" and not a "push."

Re: Users hate change

#188

Post by dang »

svnpenn wrote: post #128
johnday wrote: post #33

It's interesting to compare the user responses to updates by Facebook and Twitter respectively. Facebook's UI has changed significantly over the last 15 or so years. Features have appeared and disappeared, boxes have been arranged and rearranged. But there's rarely a big fuss beyond it getting a little slower each time (roughly commensurate with consumer hardware speedup, in fact). People don't really notice and they…

I think a big part of it is tards like Mark Otto: https://github.com/mdo that make changes without regard of how useful or disruptive they are: https://twitter.com/mdo/status/830138373230653440

Please make your substantive points without personal attacks or name-calling.

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

Re: Users hate change

#189

Post by elliekelly »

grincho wrote: post #135
holy_city wrote: post #125

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Honestly? Because no software is free from bugs and there will always be a need for support. The difference between single sale and subscription can be life or death for a company, its products, and its support. But if you don't feel that a subscription to a service adds value, please don't buy it and voice your concern to the developers. Especially if they're a small shop. That said, subscriptions can be canceled. F…

Then charge for bug fixes. Charge for updates that make the application run on a new version of the OS. If those things provide sufficient value, users will pay for them. I've been paying for that for decades for my commercial text editor. And can subscriptions be canceled in practice? If you cancel your Photoshop subscription, your documents suddenly become unopenable. In this way, software subscriptions—at least fo…

> "Nice documents there. It'd be a shame it anything were to happen to them."

When you put it like that SaaS doesn't sound all that different from ransomware.

Re: Users hate change

#190

Post by isalmon »

flohofwoe wrote: post #5

My pet theory is that every software product has a "peak version". Before that peak version, the product is not yet in a complete state, and it is fairly obvious, both for the developer and user, what features are missing. Once the peak version is reached, new features are not added because they improve the product, but to justify selling the product again to existing customers, and to 'keep the team busy'. Instead o…

I agree and I think Craigslist is a good example here.
Post reply on HN