Microsoft Addresses Windows 7 Tester Concerns - Testers Respond (
Page 2 of 2 )
Overall, Sinofsky provided a detailed account of
how Microsoft incorporates feedback from users and how the company makes
decisions as to what to address and in what order. For instance, he said:
The
challenge of how to incorporate all the feedback at this stage in the cycle is
significant. It is emotional for us at Microsoft and the source of both
considerable pride and also some consternation. We often say "no matter
what happens, someone always said it would." By that we mean, on any given
issue you can be assured that all sides will be represented by passionate and
informed views of how to resolve it, often in direct opposition to each other
plus every view in the middle. That means for the vast majority of issues there
is no right or wrong in an absolute sense, only a good decision within the
context of a given situation. We see this quite a bit in the debates about how
features should work—multiple solutions proposed and debate takes place in
comments on a blog (people even do whole blogs about how things should work).
But ultimately on the Windows development team we have to make a call as we're
seeing a lot of people are looking forward to us finishing Windows 7, which
means we need to stop changing the product and ship it. We might not always
make the right call and we'll admit if we don't make the right call, even if we
find changing the behavior is not possible.
One of the testers expressing frustration of the
type Sinofsky was responding to is Chris
Holmes, who authors the GeekSmack blog. In a recent post, Holmes wrote, "I know I
drifted off into a bit of a rant ... and hopefully this feedback is taken
seriously by the Windows team (hey, there's a chance, it's not like we're
dealing with the Windows Live team, those people don't know the meaning of the
word feedback)."
Yet, in
another post, Holmes noted that Sinofsky personally responded to one of his
queries. Holmes wrote, "I honestly was not expecting a reply as I
understand that Steven is undoubtedly a very busy man. But when I checked my in-box
a few hours later, not only did he respond, but he did a very good job
explaining his position and why the interim builds were not a good option for
this release cycle."
And a commenter to Sinofsky's own post said:
The
frustrating thing about all my feedback on Microsoft Connect is that most of
the time I got one reply: "You should create a DCR. This is not a
bug." My response: "How can I create a DCR?" And I got no
answer[...]
And there
are sites like the Windows 7 Taskforce. Where users discuss and most of the
time come to a consensus. There is 1 issue that "will be fixed" and 4
things that are fixed. One feature request was marked as "fixed" when
in fact it's not. Out of over 500 entries. Most of these things wouldn't be
hard to implement: Adding 1px borders around elements, changing bitmaps,
changing colors and so on have NO impact on stability and don't have to be
localized. I don't get why MSFT
doesn't change those things. If only to make Windows look more polished.
Meanwhile, Sinofsky summarized his argument: "The
work of acting on feedback responsibly and managing the development of Windows
through all phases of the process is something we are very sincere about.
Internally, we've talked a lot about being a learning organization and how
we're always learning how to do a better job, improve the work we do, and in
the process work to make Windows even better."