> that's a strong signal that the developers don't care about what the users need.
No, I can guarantee that if I went and asked any of the clients at my current company whether they wanted universal undo or the next core feature that we're working on, none of them would choose universal undo.
That's the point that the original commenter was getting at:
> I've contracted for a small dev contracting shop, and it's amazing how, when customers come with a long wishlist of things they want a piece of software to do, these customers quickly "stop caring" about most of these features when they see actual dollar amounts next to each line item.
Of course users want this stuff when they think it's free, but it's not free. Once they realize that it's not free, they very quickly come up with very different priority lists. Being honest about which features are hard, and which features will result in delays, is an unpleasant but important part of caring about users.
The lack of universal undo, a.k.a. non-destructive editing, has been a showstopper for a lot of would-be GIMP and Audacity users for a decade or more. Literally none of the other features matter because using the software is not an option. But obviously it wouldn't top the list of requested features if you polled the current users for whom it's not a showstopper.
This should still be handled by talking to potential users (why don't you use GIMP) and evaluating the cost-benefits of supporting those users.
Case in point, universal undo matters for creative applications like Blender, Gimp, Photosop, Audacity, etc... For how many people are the lack of features like custom branding or dark modes showstoppers in Gimp? And even if it would be nice to have those, are there enough users for whom its a showstopper to justify ignoring existing users who want something focused on their needs?
I'm not arguing that there's never a context where you'd work on stuff on this list, I'm arguing that the list isn't free, and because of that should be prioritized alongside other features and maintenance based on user research.
No, I can guarantee that if I went and asked any of the clients at my current company whether they wanted universal undo or the next core feature that we're working on, none of them would choose universal undo.
That's the point that the original commenter was getting at:
> I've contracted for a small dev contracting shop, and it's amazing how, when customers come with a long wishlist of things they want a piece of software to do, these customers quickly "stop caring" about most of these features when they see actual dollar amounts next to each line item.
Of course users want this stuff when they think it's free, but it's not free. Once they realize that it's not free, they very quickly come up with very different priority lists. Being honest about which features are hard, and which features will result in delays, is an unpleasant but important part of caring about users.