A negative about CC frequent updates

[Walter Soyka]

[Herb Sevush] “The difficulty comes in integrating the new information into the old. it is not hard to document a new feature, Adobe does this now with their release notes. What’s hard is integrating, let’s say, a new timeline feature into the already existing chapter you have on timeline layouts. figuring out how to relate the new to the old and present it in a seamless way.”

Ok, that makes sense — but is this really harder than actually designing and implementing the feature? Why can’t this work be done in parallel if necessary?

Walter Soyka
Designer & Mad Scientist at Keen Live [link]
Motion Graphics, Widescreen Events, Presentation Design, and Consulting
@keenlive   |   RenderBreak [blog]   |   Profile [LinkedIn]

[Herb Sevush]

[Walter Soyka] “but is this really harder than actually designing and implementing the feature? Why can’t this work be done in parallel if necessary?”

$$$ – you don’t sell subscriptions based on your documentation. Why do they outsource their help desk to India? Why spend to create your own manuals when many people are happy to watch zero cost self-made youtube tutorials. Garry Huff said he never looks at manuals — I’m guessing he’s in a large majority.

But the thing about good technical writing is that the tech writers add another layer of critical eyes before a product is released – I don’t know of any tech writer who would have let the software designers call a multicam feature “edit cameras” – in a normal documentation workflow the tech writers serve as a crucial, and often annoying, feedback loop for the developers.

The theme of my original post is that there is a cost for everything, and I believe the true underlying cost for quicker release cycles will be disorganization. It doesn’t have to be true, but it will cost more money to fight the additional chaos these quicker cycles bring and I don’t see enough of a constituency for the dollars to be spent.

Herb Sevush
Zebra Productions
—————————
nothin’ attached to nothin’
“Deciding the spine is the process of editing” F. Bieberkopf

[Kevin Monahan]

Hi Herb,
You’ve got some good points here. As the docs lead for CS5.5 and CS6, I can appreciate what you have to say.

Unfortunately, I don’t think the docs system will have another indexing system, and as Dennis said, search is the best way to find details about an issue.

I will forward this thread to the current docs leads for DV and will see what I can do to help improve the Help experience going forward.

Thanks,
Kevin

Kevin Monahan
Support Product Manager—DVA
Adobe After Effects
Adobe Premiere Pro
Adobe
Follow Me on Twitter!

[Jeremy Garchow]

[Herb Sevush] “The theme of my original post is that there is a cost for everything, and I believe the true underlying cost for quicker release cycles will be disorganization. It doesn’t have to be true, but it will cost more money to fight the additional chaos these quicker cycles bring and I don’t see enough of a constituency for the dollars to be spent.”

I have to agree, although I can’t figure out if this is good, bad, or indifferent. This general theme was brought up, wrapped in a different set of issues over here: https://forums.creativecow.net/thread/335/69006

In short, at this time in history, software is constantly evolving, and versions are no longer, or at least they are not as obvious.

I also feel like there could be a price for going too fast. In that thread, the theme of a constant state of beta was discussed. That thread served as bit of foreshadowing as after we talked about it, Apple released an update that was supposed to add capability to 4k screens with OS 10.9.3 (and maybe it did, I don’t know), and in that process, it broke some functions for people using 3 monitors. Someone on that thread brought up that with the current state of development, problems should get fixed in a matter of days. In the case of this issue, this fix still has not been released. Of course, this may be an isolated incident, but it simply may also be the state of the art.

[Andrew Kimery]

[Jeremy Garchow] “I also feel like there could be a price for going too fast. In that thread, the theme of a constant state of beta was discussed. That thread served as bit of foreshadowing as after we talked about it, Apple released an update that was supposed to add capability to 4k screens with OS 10.9.3 (and maybe it did, I don’t know), and in that process, it broke some functions for people using 3 monitors. Someone on that thread brought up that with the current state of development, problems should get fixed in a matter of days. In the case of this issue, this fix still has not been released. Of course, this may be an isolated incident, but it simply may also be the state of the art.”

Maybe I’m missing something but what’s new about software updates accidentally breaking something? “Don’t update/upgrade mid project” and “Always backup before up you update/upgrade” have been the better safe than sorry mottos of computing ever since I got into computers (mid-90’s).

I will agree that once home Internet connections became common place it seemed like more products were shipped at less that 100% because companies knew they could issue downloadable fixes but even this tactic is well worn though.

[Jeremy Garchow]

[Andrew Kimery] “Maybe I’m missing something but what’s new about software updates accidentally breaking something? “Don’t update/upgrade mid project” and “Always backup before up you update/upgrade” have been the better safe than sorry mottos of computing ever since I got into computers (mid-90’s).”

The argument was that if something does break, the fixes come more quickly since everything is supposed to.

You would have to read the thread, but I don’t blame you if you don’t.

Also, around the same time, Apple released a new version of iTunes that hid the User folder (11.2). The fix for that came out the next day (11.2.1), and then another release came out a few days after that which fixed a bug with podcasts (11.2.2). The thing is 11.2 was supposed to greatly enhance the podcast experience.

So, here’s two updates that were supposed to deliver new and updated feature sets, but instead broke the things that were worked on.

If I need the features that are being released in these micro updates, but really, those microupates BREAK the related features they are supposed to fix and enhance, that would mean I would never update and accept a content state of broken.

[Dennis Radeke]

Good points as always Herb. Ultimately, we try as best we can and as you said, it is good for many people. Can we do better? Always! Within the support pages there is feedback and contacting support – both of which could be vehicles to improve a specific topic. I’ll ask to see if there are other ways to have users provide specific details on improving the support/help pages.

Thanks

[Dennis Radeke]

[Scott Witthaus] “What about stability and varying systems?”

Well, we obviously put a strong emphasis on stability with every single feature and release we do with any product. Also, with our agile development model, it encourages stability through its method.

[Scott Witthaus] “Also, how does a subscription set-up push Adobe to keep pace with development and releases? Seems to me that there would be no rush as the annual fees have already been paid.”

Exactly the opposite! If we are providing valuable features that are important to users (like each of you) on a regular basis (average 2-3x per year) then you hopefully are happy with the subscription model that we provide. It’s the classic buyer/seller contract – if we are giving you a good service, then you are a satisfied customer. With the subscription model, we have an ongoing requirement to maintain your satisfaction. If we don’t, you have no reason to maintain your subscription.

Dennis – Adobe guy

[Andrew Kimery]

[Jeremy Garchow] “You would have to read the thread, but I don’t blame you if you don’t.”

I read the thread but I didn’t participate.

[Jeremy Garchow] “If I need the features that are being released in these micro updates, but really, those microupates BREAK the related features they are supposed to fix and enhance, that would mean I would never update and accept a content state of broken.”

I guess my base point of view is just different. IMO software is always going to be broken in some capacity (especially software that comes out on a regular basis) and the timeline of it getting fixed is full of variables (how complex is the fix, how wide spread is the bug, how does it compare to other bugs and features that need to addressed etc.). Micro updates will have bugs and macro updates will have bugs.

When a new OS or NLE version comes out my rule of thumb is not to upgrade until after the first point release because it is inevitable that big bugs will be present. Even for smaller updates (things like iTunes or Apple’s ProApps updates) I will always wait a week or two before updating. In the past I felt like that was the norm (at least in the professional community) but now it seems like most people race to downloaded the latest update without a care in the world.

In a nut shell I guess I haven’t noticed a decline in the quality of software in the past couple of years, but I have noticed an increasing carelessness by users when it comes to updating their software. On a related note, I think many times there is a ‘ship it now, patch it later’ attitude (that’s to the ease of Internet updates) but I don’t think that’s anything new or unique.

[Jeremy Garchow]

[Andrew Kimery] “I guess my base point of view is just different. IMO software is always going to be broken in some capacity (especially software that comes out on a regular basis) and the timeline of it getting fixed is full of variables (how complex is the fix, how wide spread is the bug, how does it compare to other bugs and features that need to addressed etc.). Micro updates will have bugs and macro updates will have bugs. “

[Andrew Kimery] ” On a related note, I think many times there is a ‘ship it now, patch it later’ attitude (that’s to the ease of Internet updates) but I don’t think that’s anything new or unique.”

I think we are circling around the same issues.

I was not arguing that things were less broken, but the constant update cycle seems like more things are broken more often because there is simply more of it. Features and bug fix releases are now one in the same.

To Herb’s point, there seems to be a bit of disorganization. Companies are saying the rush to the update frenzy will help customers because development can now happen more quickly due to the reorganization of development cycles. Features can get reprioritized and released when they are ready instead of being released because they had to meet a package deadline or comply with trade laws, or whatever.

I updated iTunes because I use the podcast app but it was kinda buggy. The very things that were annoying about the podcast app were supposed to be fixed with the new update, which then broke something completely unrelated, it then took another update to fix that bug, and also fix other bugs that were supposed to be features. Did you get all that?

A feature of 11.2.1 was podcasts would delete when you are finished with them (after 24 hours). 11.2.2 fixed a bug where the podcast would redownload after you manually deleted it. This is a bug fix to fix the bug of a podcast redownloading itself after it was deleted, when the feature of 11.2.1 was to delete podcasts.

In short, they restored true functionality of the very feature they worked on a version ago. It doesn’t make any sense. If deleting the podcasts where a feature, and then they redownloaded themselves after deleting them, what does that say about the QA of the development, how does this help me a consumer, and how does this help Apple?