
For as long as I've been a software developer and used bug tracking systems, we have struggled with the same fundamental problem in every single project we've worked on: how do you tell bugs from feature requests?
Sure, there are some obvious crashes that are clearly bugs. But that's maybe 10% of what you deal with on a daily basis, and the real killer showstopper bugs -- the ones that prevent normal usage of the system -- are eradicated quickly, lest the entire project fail. The rest of the entries in your bug tracking system, the vast majority, exist in an uncertain gray no-man's land. Did users report a bug? Not quite. Are users asking for a new or enhanced feature? Not quite. Well, which is it?
It's an insoluble problem. Furthermore, I think most bug tracking systems fail us because they make us ask the wrong questions. They force you to pick a side. Hatfields vs. McCoys. Coke vs. Pepsi. Bug vs. Feature Request. It's a painful and arbitrary decision, because most of the time, it's both. There's no difference between a bug and a feature request from the user's perspective. If you want to do something with an application (or website) and you can't do it because that feature isn't implemented -- how is that any different than not being able to do something due to an error message?
Consider an example: Visual Studio doesn't use the correct font when building Windows applications. Is this a bug or a feature request?
Personally, I consider this a bug. I guess Microsoft does too, at least in theory, because it's been in Microsoft's Connect bug tracking system for over four years now. When you build a Windows application, wouldn't you expect it to use the default font of the underlying operating system you're running it on, unless you've explicitly told it otherwise? Well, guess what happens when you create a new form in Visual Studio 2008 and instantiate a label control.
Party like it's 1996, folks, because you'll get MS Sans Serif, and you'll like it. That is the default for each new form. Never mind that every new application you build will look like -- let me put this as delicately as I can -- ass.
Here's a comparison of a label with the default font, versus one that was explicitly set to the default GUI font.
Judging by the applications I've used, most Windows developers couldn't care less about design. That's bad. What's even worse is learning that same design carelessness has shipped in the box with every copy of Visual Studio since 2002.
Of course, matters of design are so subjective. If only there were some definitive source we could refer to on the matter of proper Windows GUI font usage. Some sort of reference standard, as it were. Like, say, the top rules for Windows Vista User Experience from Microsoft:
There are 12 rules in total, but the rule I'm looking for is right at the top -- applications should use the system font.
The hilarity of this list is already sort of self evident, given that I've written an entire post bemoaning the general lack of fit and finish in Windows Vista. I couldn't help but laugh at rule number 12: Reserve time for "fit and finish"! Now there's a rule Microsoft should have taken to heart while developing Windows Vista. Understand this is all coming from a guy who likes Vista.
But I digress.
Despite the windows forms font behavior in Visual Studio 2008 contradicting rule number one of Microsoft's own design guidelines, this "bug" has gone unfixed for over four years. It has been silently reclassified as a "feature request" and effectively ignored. Nothing's broken, after all: using the wrong font hasn't caused any application crashes or lost productivity. On the other hand, imagine how many BigCorpCo apps have been built since then that violate Microsoft's own design rules for their platform. Either because the developers didn't realize that the app font didn't match the operating system, or because they didn't have the time to write the workaround code necessary to make it do the right thing.
Yes, this is a small thing. And I'm sure fixing it wouldn't result in selling an additional umpteen thousand Visual Studio licenses to BigCorpCo, which is why it hasn't happened yet.
But the question remains: is this a bug, or a feature request?
One of my favorite things about UserVoice -- which we use for Stack Overflow -- is the way it intentionally blurs the line between bugs and feature requests. Users never understand the difference anyway, and what's worse, developers tend to use that division as a wedge against users. Nudge things you don't want to do into that "feature request" bucket, and proceed to ignore them forever. Argue strongly and loudly enough that something reported as a "bug" clearly isn't, and you may not have to to do any work to fix it. Stop dividing the world into Bugs and Feature Requests, and both of these project pathologies go away.
I wish we could, as an industry, spend less time fighting tooth and nail over definitions, painstakingly placing feedback in the "bug" or "feature request" buckets -- and more time doing something constructive with our users' feedback.
| [advertisement] Tired of wrestling all day with JIRA? Lighthouse takes the suck out of issue tracking. All the features you need, none of the cruft to get in the way. Read 5 reasons Lighthouse helps you get more done than JIRA. |
Tagi: ms sans serif, insoluble problem, wrg, real killer, bug tracking system, fundamental problem, feature request, entire project, instantiate, deci, feature requests, software developer, pepsi, crashes, error message, coke, bugs, operating system, perspectiv


Continue reading Barnes & Noble Nook to get an update this week? Sure sounds like it
Filed under: Handhelds
Barnes & Noble Nook to get an update this week? Sure sounds like it originally appeared on Engadget on Sun, 20 Dec 2009 13:30:00 EST. Please see our terms for use of feeds.
Permalink | | Email this | Comments
Okay, so it isn't as artsy as making gooey bugs in a miniature oven, but HexBug's little micro-robotic tchotchkes are a good time in their own right. The digital entomologists at HexBugs decided to unleash the new Ant Micro and Nano Newton at New York City's Toy Fair, and for some peculiar reason we were quite enamored with watching these autonomous, high speed creatures run around the carpeted show floor. Powered by two button cell batteries, $11.99 Ant Micro has front and rear touch sensors that allow it to maneuver around objects in its path and it's hard, colored transparent exoskeleton casing was durable enough for the little guys to crash into a wooden plank and reverse course. The $9.99 tiny motor powered, 12-legged Nano Newton holds a special place in our heart, and the Jolly Rancher sized caterpillar vibrates uncontrollably and is able to flip itself over and walk forward. HexBugs will also sell different Habitat sets so the creatures can run around on their own without adult supervision. Luckily for you, these little guys weren't camera shy -- check the pics below!HexBug's robotic creatures are the creepy crawlers of the future originally appeared on Engadget on Mon, 15 Feb 2010 21:22:00 EST. Please see our terms for use of feeds.
Permalink |
HexBug | Email this | Comments
Sure, we already told you what Hulu Plus looked like on iPhone, iPad and a Samsung TV, and not much has changed since that juncture, but we expect a number of you care quite a bit about how it will operate on PlayStation 3, especially considering you'll (presently) have to cough up an additional $50 annually for the privilege. The good news is it's absolutely nothing like the PS3's disc-based Netflix solution -- here, you're looking at a responsive experience through and through, and the interface is about as simple and full-featured as we'd hoped. Continue reading Hulu Plus on PS3, hands-on (update: video)
Hulu Plus on PS3, hands-on (update: video) originally appeared on Engadget on Wed, 14 Jul 2010 19:23:00 EDT. Please see our terms for use of feeds.
Permalink | | Email this | Comments
These watches from Tokyo Street take three novel approaches to telling time: one draws a target, the other makes a graph, and the last displays ants. Glowing, inscrutable little ants.
The Ever-Increasing watch slowly draws a graph of the time which, though it displays what some might call a rather predictable function, gets the point across just fine. The SCOPE II is more direct: a small targeting reticle locks onto the current time, which is arranged among a bunch of incorrect ones. Then there's the ANT.
It's not clear what each of the the ANT watch's ants symbolize, but if you take for granted that they probably correlate somehow to the current time, then you can accept that it's at least a useful icebreaker. The SCOPE II and Ever Increasing watches are priced at $180 and the ANT at $120 from Japanese überimporter and Gizmodo Gallery suppoter Gizmine. [Tokyo Street at Gizmine]