Thanks for sharing Andrew Hatchett. For most of us, sending feed back is obviously the best way to let Google know what would make a product better (for us). But............................
It is obviously important that we also understand Google's intention and purpose for launching a particular product and who their intended user will be. Then realize it is not always us and that if you are asking for things outside of Google's intended purpose, you should not be disappointed when it doesn't happen.
HOA's have been the perfect example of that. A platform IMHO that was intended to have been a product for business owners to easily and instantly bring people in multiple locations together for virtual meetings. But then an opportunity was realized and the platform soon got morphed into show type presentation to build global authority in ones niche and ultimately to sell products to a global audience (Damn marketers, lol). Then when it made sense for Google (as they followed their original intention) to remove redundancy by moving video streams to YouTube (their own actual video platform), features like comment tracker were not compatible and removed sending the global marketers into outrage and panic as they threatened to leave G+ while demanding answers to questions like;
- "Why would Google remove "our" engagement tools (comment tracker)"?
- "How can Google just change our product and force me to learn something else? (their free product we often forget).
- "How can I be expected build a business on a platform that continually changes"? (forgetting that as marketers, we changed the intent of the platform not Google).
This article explains that for a business meeting platform, as I previously speculated Hangouts were originally intended to be, it makes perfect sense that suggestions like being able to include more attendees in a meeting, or the ability to have a user interface that controls the quality of the meeting by being able to mute an oblivious and distracting paper crinkler, would be priorities in Google's eyes based on the original intention of the platform. And, also why little if any consideration might be given to providing Comment Tracker, or, to saving comments and questions that would probably be dealt with at the time in most meetings, and ultimately becoming irrelevant after the meeting ends.
Of course the changes that affect us personally are always the worst and most questionable in my experience. And while Google is not perfect, and may not always communicate with us as we would like them to. When assessing the actual impact of changes, it is important before grumbling, that we understand Google's intention and realize that we all use the products differently. Then we need to leave constructive and relevant feedback rather than complaints, and finally, realize that based on the number of updates and fixes I see each week, Google is listening to the masses, and that "relevant" suggestions are being constantly implemented.
Thanks for sharing Andrew Hatchett. For most of us, sending feed back is obviously the best way to let Google know what would make a product better (for us). But............................
ReplyDeleteIt is obviously important that we also understand Google's intention and purpose for launching a particular product and who their intended user will be. Then realize it is not always us and that if you are asking for things outside of Google's intended purpose, you should not be disappointed when it doesn't happen.
HOA's have been the perfect example of that. A platform IMHO that was intended to have been a product for business owners to easily and instantly bring people in multiple locations together for virtual meetings. But then an opportunity was realized and the platform soon got morphed into show type presentation to build global authority in ones niche and ultimately to sell products to a global audience (Damn marketers, lol). Then when it made sense for Google (as they followed their original intention) to remove redundancy by moving video streams to YouTube (their own actual video platform), features like comment tracker were not compatible and removed sending the global marketers into outrage and panic as they threatened to leave G+ while demanding answers to questions like;
- "Why would Google remove "our" engagement tools (comment tracker)"?
- "How can Google just change our product and force me to learn something else? (their free product we often forget).
- "How can I be expected build a business on a platform that continually changes"? (forgetting that as marketers, we changed the intent of the platform not Google).
This article explains that for a business meeting platform, as I previously speculated Hangouts were originally intended to be, it makes perfect sense that suggestions like being able to include more attendees in a meeting, or the ability to have a user interface that controls the quality of the meeting by being able to mute an oblivious and distracting paper crinkler, would be priorities in Google's eyes based on the original intention of the platform. And, also why little if any consideration might be given to providing Comment Tracker, or, to saving comments and questions that would probably be dealt with at the time in most meetings, and ultimately becoming irrelevant after the meeting ends.
Of course the changes that affect us personally are always the worst and most questionable in my experience. And while Google is not perfect, and may not always communicate with us as we would like them to. When assessing the actual impact of changes, it is important before grumbling, that we understand Google's intention and realize that we all use the products differently. Then we need to leave constructive and relevant feedback rather than complaints, and finally, realize that based on the number of updates and fixes I see each week, Google is listening to the masses, and that "relevant" suggestions are being constantly implemented.