If some app removed a function that you depended on in a newer version, you'd want to go back to the old version. At that point, you wouldn't be able to just use the app.
Then you'd have to spend your time waiting for the author of your walled-garden app to fix the problem or spend your time finding a different app to use and then spend more time transitioning to it.
In any case, I think that the trade-off needs to be acknowledged for what it is. You're trading your freedom for convenience. Of course this is the American way, what with all the overflowing amounts of freedom that we have.
Please stop thinking like a developer. Firstly that very rarely happens in the apps that I use from the Play/App Store. Secondly, if an app has a dealbreaker, I'll just use another one.
Most people don't think "Oh man I love Instagram v50.1.2",they just use Instagram.
Incorrect. It happens regularly and it certainly affects non-developers. I've seen it too many times. Look through any apps review history and you'll find people complaining about changes that they have no control over.
It's the same thing with the OS. There are always tons of complaints after a new release of iOS.
> ...I'll just use another one.
Yep. And you'll spend your time looking for another one and then you'll spend more time transitioning over to it.
> Most people don't think "Oh man I love Instagram v50.1.2",they just use Instagram.
Nope. Instead they think - "Oh man, Instagram sucks after that last update, but what can I do about it??" and then they give up.
App reviews aren't really empirical. People write reviews for things they don't like much much more than for things which they're fine with.
If I really really hate an update, I don't spend more than a minute transitioning. I just look at the "Apps like this tab". Another feature that is not there natively in Windows/Linux and requires third parties to make subpar lists.
If new software was really so terrible, people would be abandoning apps, not complaining about them which is what happened with Linux and to a lesser extent, Windows.
Yes they are. The definition of empirical is that you can observe the evidence. This is easily observable.
What have you presented besides your own anecdotes?
> "Apps like this" on Windows/Linux
It's called Google. The same thing I use to find iOS apps because Apples app store search and recommendations are horrible. None of the app store searches are really any good and I'm pretty sure Google is the number one place that people usually search for things. I don't know anybody who opens up their app store to search for an app.
Anyway, argue all you want - you're wrong. People care about updates that mess up their stuff whether you can bring yourself to acknowledge that or not.
Incorrect again. The fact that you can go onto any apps review history and see evidence that people are unhappy with updates that break their stuff is exactly the definition of empirical evidence.
Sorry, but none of your badly formed, hand-wavy reasoning has proven that wrong. Also, nobody is arguing that "the majority" think something - I'm arguing against your completely anecdotal and un-evidenced claim that it "rarely" happens.
What evidence do you have that it rarely happens? None that I can see so far...
It's a biased sample because people who are fine with their app don't write reviews. The sample is polluted.
My evidence can drawn from the fact that ten percent of people write reviews. A fraction of that are negative. If an occurrence happens say five out of a hundred times,that's a rare occurrence.
I'll use the previous statements one at a time to build a case. I'll use only the statements that you have said or accepted. Everything I'm typing, has been said before.
People who are fine with their apps don't write reviews.
Ten percent of the user base (at most) write reviews.
This includes the people who want to complain more than the people who don't.
In this ten percent a fraction of reviews are negative.
A fraction of ten percent of the total users feel negatively about the app.
This is a rare occurrence.
If you feel I've misquoted any part then I apologize.
> People who are fine with their apps don't write reviews.
This is obviously incorrect since you can see positive reviews, many of them in fact, on many apps. I myself have posted positive reviews... not sure when you thought I agreed to this.
That alone pretty much kills your whole theory. Sorry but I still don’t agree with you and I think you’re really reaching here. Most importantly though, you have presented zero evidence in favor of your claims.
Positively reviewed is someone who likes the app. I was very careful with my language to avoid this confusion. I said people who are fine with their app.
OK and I’ve seen plenty of 2.5 - 3 star reviews where people were just fine with the app too. Same thing with products on Amazon. I’ve also left review such as this myself.
People like sharing their experiences with others. They’ve been doing it for thousands of years. Go figure.
