Also when App Store will reflect proper state of applications to update without need to shut it down and restart? (the number is displayed correctly yet list inside store is empty and shows only previously updated apps available for opening.
Yes. Let's focus on bulbs, refrigirator and some advanced stuff... as soon as we get basics fixed. This phone primarily - remote control is not its basic function.
Not happen to me. Said there’re 6 updates waiting. There are 6 updates waiting.
StrangeDays said: [...] There are so many moving parts in modern software systems that it's impossible to test for and catch every single thing, and sometimes the ways a change touches other aspects of the system are unexpected. This is just fact. You can't write automated tests to catch every possible variable and scenario. It is impossible. If it were possible, we wouldn't have bugs, ever.
Avid Pro Tools is probably the most advanced and sophisticated audio production and post software in the world. It has a huge user base, performing a staggeringly diverse set of tasks with it.
It is also the most fragile software I have ever used. Changing the driver for a video card can bring it down. Installing another application can break it. Some features work one day but not the next.
The "Known Issues" section of the manual is HUGE! Pages and pages and pages... almost half the manual! I was left confused, wondering how to react.
On one hand, I found it bewildering that such a massive number of known issues could be left unrepaired while the company continued to add new features, some of seemingly questionable value. I thought they should be concentrating their effort on making it more stable before even thinking about adding anything, especially when adding features may also add even more bugs.
On the other hand, I was kind of impressed by how well they had documented this litany of potholes. It was obvious they're doing a really good job of tracking what users are telling them.
So how can a company like Avid, with its reputation for providing some of the most widely-used professional software tools in the world, allow all these issues to go unresolved?
Then I went to the user forum and saw the number of people complaining that they aren't getting any value from their subscription or support plan because the software has become "stagnant" and new features aren't being added quickly enough. Further, for every post chastising Avid for a bug, there was one from a pragmatist suggesting that Pro Tools "is what it is" and instead of complaining, users should be doing whatever they can to protect Pro Tools from conditions that may break it. This gave me the impression that many users consider new features a higher priority than fixing bugs.
At one point I felt frustrated enough to walk away. I spent a few weeks looking at alternatives. It quickly became apparent that the benefits I enjoy by using Pro Tools outweigh the problems. I found software that was more stable than Pro Tools, but it lacked features I consider critical to my work. I had to decide: use a product that is more stable but less capable, or use the product that really serves me well despite a few flaws?
The point?
1. Without new features, users stop buying. Without revenue, there's no money to fix bugs. Since new features will almost inevitably introduce new bugs, it's a never ending cycle. It appears that bugs are an inevitable fact of life, and expectations of perfection will just lead to unhappiness.
2. When even the core user base can't agree on priorities, it's gotta be tough for the developer to know where to concentrate effort and resources. If they do what makes Joe happy, they upset Dave. If they do what Dave wants, they upset Joanne. The fact that they aren't making you or me happy doesn't mean what they're doing is "wrong."
3. Bugs suck, but since no developer is immune, the best we can do is minimize our exposure and support the companies that do the best job of dealing with them.
This is at least the second time Apple altered iPhone behavior then was forced to restore it. Apple is lacking key person who really understand how iPhone should function.
Ah yes, they need one person to prevent any bug from existing in millions of lines of code. Of course.
Sorry bro, but that isn't how software works. I'm on a much smaller endeavor with a much smaller team, and every new release and change introduces risk. Unforeseen things happen because humans. There will never be a day when software exists free of bugs. And even if Apple were to implement a feature freeze to fix all bugs, besides being impossible it would take years and then you'd be whining about "Apple is stagnant!" etc.
Just deal with the reality and stop expecting Apple to obtain some unachievable level of perfection.
Your personal endeavor is too little in scale. You seem have never heard about product validation.
Nonsense, you’ve just failed to comprehend the point being made — that even smaller software endeavors introduce risk, let alone the larger endeavors (which I’ve also been a part of) such as entire operating systems like iOS and macOS.
You don't work with software, do you?
But I get it...if you did work in software, your releases would be perfect! The best! You’d MAKE SOFTWARE GREAT AGAIN!
Even you have larger endeavors the product validation person must be fooling around. In production validation a new software release must not alter existing behavior. This kind of bug is called show stopper.
No. Again, you have very little understand of how software development works. In the majority of cases, a bug is not because some QA guy was screwing around and failed to try something. Bugs happen due to complexity, and unexpected ramifications. There are so many moving parts in modern software systems that it's impossible to test for and catch every single thing, and sometimes the ways a change touches other aspects of the system are unexpected. This is just fact. You can't write automated tests to catch every possible variable and scenario. It is impossible. If it were possible, we wouldn't have bugs, ever.
You can't pretend your away around this. The mere fact that change releases can and do alter existing behavior is why we have software developers, support developers, QA developers, etc. Your attempts at over-simplification of how software developer works are just wishful thinking.
Your logic is wrong. And you never worked with real QA people. You are stretching things about testing. Testing does not promise to cover every thing. Of course it is not possible to catch every thing. But this does not tests cannot find breaking of existing behavior. Because an existing behavior may already have tests created before. A show stopper is just like that. A software release may cause a test to fail while it was working in previous releases.
My logic isn’t wrong, this what I’ve done for twenty years. You know, as a career. I’ve worked for Webby-winning dot com bubble websites, fortune 100 and 500 companies, household brands, banks, energy companies, local and federal govs. And you’ve refuted nothing of what I’ve shared with you — bugs happens because things affect other things in unexpected ways, and you cannot have tests in place for every single possible thing that could go wrong. Not possible.
But you're butthurt that a bug exists, for something I’m willing to bet didn’t even affect you. Did it?
I have not refuted that bugs happens and you cannot have tests for every single possible thing. But your logic is because of this reason Apple is allowed to break remote access to shared users of the Home app. This is wrong.
Priorities. The original problem is critical to security. The interim fix will cause inconvenience to some users. Accepting temporary inconvenience for a subset of users is preferable to a gaping security hole for all. Coming up with a solution that does not temporarily inconvenience some users will take time during which the security hole remains open.
Even after the update on my iPad and her iPhone, I still can’t share my home settings because they changed 1 thing. You can only share it to an @icloud.com email address. If she changes her address on her phone, none of her iMessages will turn up and she’ll have to get everyone to add a new address. That’s never going to happen.
Being a woman, the most important thing is talking about absolutely nothing important all day to her friends is far more important than controlling the house. Now she sends me a message and I have to do it!
Comments
ios 11.2
It is also the most fragile software I have ever used. Changing the driver for a video card can bring it down. Installing another application can break it. Some features work one day but not the next.
The "Known Issues" section of the manual is HUGE! Pages and pages and pages... almost half the manual! I was left confused, wondering how to react.
On one hand, I found it bewildering that such a massive number of known issues could be left unrepaired while the company continued to add new features, some of seemingly questionable value. I thought they should be concentrating their effort on making it more stable before even thinking about adding anything, especially when adding features may also add even more bugs.
On the other hand, I was kind of impressed by how well they had documented this litany of potholes. It was obvious they're doing a really good job of tracking what users are telling them.
So how can a company like Avid, with its reputation for providing some of the most widely-used professional software tools in the world, allow all these issues to go unresolved?
Then I went to the user forum and saw the number of people complaining that they aren't getting any value from their subscription or support plan because the software has become "stagnant" and new features aren't being added quickly enough. Further, for every post chastising Avid for a bug, there was one from a pragmatist suggesting that Pro Tools "is what it is" and instead of complaining, users should be doing whatever they can to protect Pro Tools from conditions that may break it. This gave me the impression that many users consider new features a higher priority than fixing bugs.
At one point I felt frustrated enough to walk away. I spent a few weeks looking at alternatives. It quickly became apparent that the benefits I enjoy by using Pro Tools outweigh the problems. I found software that was more stable than Pro Tools, but it lacked features I consider critical to my work. I had to decide: use a product that is more stable but less capable, or use the product that really serves me well despite a few flaws?
The point?
1. Without new features, users stop buying. Without revenue, there's no money to fix bugs. Since new features will almost inevitably introduce new bugs, it's a never ending cycle. It appears that bugs are an inevitable fact of life, and expectations of perfection will just lead to unhappiness.
2. When even the core user base can't agree on priorities, it's gotta be tough for the developer to know where to concentrate effort and resources. If they do what makes Joe happy, they upset Dave. If they do what Dave wants, they upset Joanne. The fact that they aren't making you or me happy doesn't mean what they're doing is "wrong."
3. Bugs suck, but since no developer is immune, the best we can do is minimize our exposure and support the companies that do the best job of dealing with them.
Priorities. The original problem is critical to security. The interim fix will cause inconvenience to some users. Accepting temporary inconvenience for a subset of users is preferable to a gaping security hole for all. Coming up with a solution that does not temporarily inconvenience some users will take time during which the security hole remains open.
I can accept that.
You can only share it to an @icloud.com email address. If she changes her address on her phone, none of her iMessages will turn up and she’ll have to get everyone to add a new address. That’s never going to happen.
Being a woman, the most important thing is talking about absolutely nothing important all day to her friends is far more important than controlling the house. Now she sends me a message and I have to do it!