Do mega huge software companies bother to do market research?

In My Humble Opinion
1

“mega huge software companies” should really read “Microsoft” but I decided to play it safe and generalize.

And also. I’m not sure where this belongs as it’s a question where the answers might be opinions as well as factual.

I often wonder, with the amount of scorn that most people lay on the software they use, if the development of that software involved any market research.

For instance. I’d imagine most people, when asked “Do you like it when we ask you if you are sure you want to do that every time you perform an action” would have said no. Many of them would have elaborated and said something along the lines of “It implies that the people who wrote this software assume that I’m dumb. If I AM dumb then I probably deserve the consequences if I didn’t intend to do that”

And, “Do you consider it a good thing when you’re typing something, and something else steals focus for no good reason?”
And, “Do you want your computer to run fast? Or do you want a lot of useless crap to be running in the background?”

2

As a programmer myself I know that it is possible to know how to write the perfect program where user satisfaction is concerned. So why, when they can write a program as if it is a wise person, do they decide to write a program as if it is an annoying turd?

Me: “Go away”

Wise person: [goes away]

Me: “Go Away”

Annoying turd: “Are you sure you want me to go away?”

Me: “LEAVE”

Annoying turd: “Ok, but you forgot to tell me how many digits you know Pi to”
Me: Thought: (I didn’t ‘forget’ you fuck. I didn’t ‘intend’ to do that. Fuck off)

3

You do? I’m a programmer (not for Microsoft), and I certainly don’t know how to write a program that will please everybody.

4

I guess I was using a kind of artistic licence in typing those words.

To be more accurate, what I am saying is…

While I am not perfect myself, I understand that the world has become sophisticated enough that a software company should be able to find out what software behaviour is likely to cause the least amount of annoyance to the most amount of people.

I have a habit of being rhetorical for effect.

In defence of my original sentence, the bit “I know that it is possible” is the bit that absolves me of any blame of stating that I myself am a perfect programmer. I am far from that. My programming since University has taken the forms of recreational programming, learing the bespoke language of a bespoke system, SQL, ASP, PHP. Apart from recreational and SQL I learned none of those from Uni. And what SQL I learned from Uni pails in comparison to what I’ve learned in employment.

5

Nope. Microsoft does zero Market research. No weight is ever given to suggestions or customer feedback. No usability studies are conducted. No instrumented versions are created. No consideration is given to any trends or new technologies. Nothing. Zilch. Never ever.

I just think up a feature I like, then write the code, and we ship it. Traditionally I do this a few days before release, without running an acceptance test, usually while playing a Jew’s harp.

6

For a company that is desperate to survive I find this incredible.

So I have to suspect you are being sarcastic.

7

The problem with these market research studies is they don’t bother to get a correct data set.

For instance, back five years ago when I had my own business, I was hired by the U of Chicago to analyze some of the data. It amazed me at such a top of the line university (and my alma mater) and say, this is total garbage. Referring to the data collected.

Tons of it I would throw out and say “start over.” Sometimes they would say “We can’t do that, just use what you have.” Which means that instead of accurate data you get something better than an estimate.

Here’s an example of faulty data. Nielsen, which we know does TV ratings, used to collect this information via people who filled in books. Well over the years that changed and it is very accurate now. But in the old days the books were horribly filled in wrong. BTW Nielsen is not a scientific study, nor does it claim to be, but that is a different thread.

One thing that I notice people fail to notice is placement of buttons on gadgets. For instance, the “on” button for a power fusion (five blade) razor is exactly where one normal grabs the handle. This is bad placement because your hand keeps accidently turning on and off the razor. Since you only need to hit the on/off button once before and after the shave, there is no reason to have that button there.

Look at libraries, the inside book drop is usually located right in the center where everyone stands. Since the inside book drop is only unloaded a few times each day it shouldn’t be located there. Because if you want to drop a book and leave you always have to say “Excuse me,” 'cause book drop is located in the center, where people check out books and as they do this they block the book drop.

Finally a lot of this “market research,” is simply lying. I worked for Starwood years ago. There “green campaign,” was simply an effort to save laundry bills by jumping on the bandwagon.

There is a website I go to and they redesigned this, of course, “to serve people better and give them a better site.” No it wasn’t. I know darn well the old site was full of workarounds. Whoever redesigned this site, closed them all up forcing you to pay for the site instead of using a work-a-round.

8

No, I’m pretty sure that’s a real Microsoft developer.

Never heard of the Content Generator feature in PowerPoint?

9

At one time, that would have been true, but today they realize that you bought the software because you had no choice.
All kidding aside, I think the biggest software companies are interested in two main goals. One is to develop ways of locking you into upgrades in a more rapid cycle and making it harder for those people that avoid them to keep getting away with it, for example by creating more and more networking intensive services like banking, information, entertainment, and security. When the network is the computer, the person (meaning the one in “personal computer”) can’t opt out of upgrades. The other goal is to keep creating components and runtimes and libraries and plugins (like .NET, ActiveX, and Flash) so that all application developers have to ante up and maintain the required staff just to keep integrating them into their products. A company like Microsoft can have a hundred programmers who pour their time into this drain, yet still have plenty of other programmers to create new value or content. A little company that might threaten Microsoft will have to work a lot harder not to just wither on the vine while keeping up with all this junk.

10

Yes, Microsoft sends me a questionnaire twice a year and then does the exact opposite. (kidding).

Honestly, if I got within a baseball bat’s distance of the MS person responsible for changing the standardized layout of their software I would be in prison for committing a good deed.

11

Are you playing “Yakety Sax” on your Jew’s harp? Because that makes everything more hilarious.

12

The answer to this question, beyond, “well, duh,” is that Microsoft and any other major software maker puts significant thought into usability and “market research.”

If you’d like a serious answer to this question, it’s a long one but the rough sketches are available here:

13

I know they put a lot of money into it, but it is still hard not to think it is wasted when everyone you know has the same set of problems with it.

I think that a bigger problem is that minor annoyances that don’t stop people from using the product are usually not addressed. You don’t care as much if everyone likes your product, just whether they use it. If you have a virtual monopoly on a particular type of software, you don’t really need to address them.

Also note that people get really mad when you do try to make those types of changes, especially if you don’t get it perfect. Look at Office 2007, for example.

As for dialog boxes that ask “Are you sure?”, people used to like them. I know it was considered an awesome feature when accidentally closing Program Manager in Windows 3.1 didn’t shut down windows without making sure you didn’t misclick, Research hasn’t caught up with the fact that they are being overused.

14

How many dumb folks do you know who really agree with that?

Yes, tons of this gets done, a lot of it by actually observing people use the software.

I think a lot of what you’re observing is that your sample (you and other technically-oriented professionals) does not at all resemble a random sample of the computer using public. To a fair extent, you are able to customize programs to meet your preferences. Other people can customize them to meet different needs (children, disabled). But there’s a reason you are not the default.

15

Bullshit. I’ve seen an entire office of trained computer users go ballistic over major changes in format. There is no fucking way MS did any real market research before introducing office 2007.

16

The problem is that people complain about perfectly reasonable measures that in the long run makes life easier for them.

The inconvenience of the Microsoft warning when you do certain things pales in comparison to the inconvenience of getting malicious software on your computer. Would you rather confirm the running of a program or have to recreate your data because a malicious program decided to delete it?

Further, computer users always bitch and moan about any change in software. Two years later, only a few diehards have problems with it – and people are complaining about the new features in the next version and asking why the things they complained about initially have changed. People don’t like change, even if that change makes their job easier. Office 2007 is clearly a major improvement in usability over older versions of office, but since it’s different, people moan that it’s no good – until they get used to it, of course.

It’s like the old joke about playwrights:

The first play comes out to bad reviews.
The second play comes out to bad reviews – saying it’s not as good as the first play.
The third play comes out to bad reviews and wondering why the playwright can’t capture the magic of his first play, which was a minor classic of the theater.
The fourth play comes out to bad reviews because it’s not as good as the second and third plays, and nowhere near as good as the first, one of the towering achievements of American theater.

17

Is “Jew’s harp” a euphemism for something?

18

how is changing the layout that is common with all MS products an improvement? It’s no different than GM rearranging their cars by moving the horn to the floor, the turn signal to the dashboard and the brakes to the steering column. It improves nothing and inconveniences everyone. The whole beauty of MS office was a standardized package.

19

No, future generations of users now no longer need to deal with the ineffective choices made in the original design. It was a fairly brief inconvenience to the current base of users to avoid permanently institutionalizing choices that had been made in the past for various reasons and were not optimal now, if they ever were. I think you’d have a hard time writing a coherent essay about why the old layout was better that didn’t include a lot of “since I knew exactly where X was buried in the menus.”

20

They do this all the time. They moved the headlights off the dash and to the steering column, and the radio/climate controls to the steering wheel. The parking brake is either a foot pedal or a pull stick, every car has it’s own selection and placement of gauges, and locations for window and door lock controls. If it’s your first time in a car, you’re guaranteed to fumble for the door handle and turn on the wipers when you wanted to hit the headlights.