Reply to post: Re: Zap, darling...

Apple to devs: Watch out, don't make the Watch into a, well, a watch

Anonymous Coward
Anonymous Coward

Re: Zap, darling...

Zap, darling...

By giving users any ability to customise the device would be "abdicating [their] responsibility as a designer". After all, they know better than us!

I've had to sanitise this because I really don't want to be identified but I used software where they refused to to allow any changes because of a similar mentality. After all what would the users of the software know about suggesting changes to make the software better?......

The management of a company I used to work for decided one day after a merger with another firm (where we got a new head of technology) that both sides of the firm should all be using the same software product across the group. This software is fairly critical to each site but isn't something that needs to interact from one site to any other and is fairly standalone. The data it produced was used on site and if it really needed to go somewhere else it would be FTP'd or some such. The new company management decide that they are going to go with supplier A who we had in the old company had ditched a while ago because their products sucked just a tiny bit and there was little innovation or desire to listen to customer suggestions. Supplier A also refused to make any changes that were suggested to them to make the product better because North America don't need it and they're our biggest market. They also said that adding the suggestions to the software might confuse people who don't need it, despite protestations that if they didn't think it was a good idea they could just hide it in a menu somewhere and stick it behind a password - no dice! So we moved to and worked with supplier B that had a good product which we liked and were happy to add the features in that we asked for "that's a very good idea give us a month to develop and test it - then it'll be in the next update. We were told that we'd be moving back to supplier A and their new product. This was "more modern" i.e. newly released - and integrated with another product from them that we'd be taking to make life 'easier' for everyone.

Shortly after having it installed at the one test site (and another one was being done) the complaints came rolling in, chief among them was "Why can't you queue items, you used to be able to?" There were also complaints about the GUI, why did actions have to be animated on the screen, that's pointless? Why was there a limit on the routines but not data that could be stored on the system etc. Is this just a version of the DOS program ported to Windows, because the functionality is the same i.e. no improvement? All of this was brushed aside or just ignored until one night someone applied an action to the database something the software company A had said was possible to reverse. It turned out it wasn't and roughly one terabyte of data at the test site was essentially cream crackered. So the staff revolted, the site manager chief among them (he said if the system wasn't removed he'd do it with a sledge hammer) and the roll out was put on hold and only the currently happening install was completed (would have cost more to drop it and go with something else - some custom hardware was already installed and paid for). So they went with software supplier C which was offering an similar but more modern version of supplier B software and there were far fewer complaints from other sites that were upgraded to the new C software.

POST COMMENT House rules

Not a member of The Register? Create a new account here.

  • Enter your comment

  • Add an icon

Anonymous cowards cannot choose their icon

Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2019