Why products get worse after upgrading?

Recently experienced the latest version of several frequently used products, including: google reader, Sina Weibo, echofon and so on. Discovering For most products, the new product means more useless features, more fancy but sleeker interfaces, more sophisticated operating experiences, poorer performance, more bugs and more than older versions of the product. Of course, the recent version of google reader relatively new feature is actually less, but the revised version, still subject to a lot of people abusive.

Why some of the original easy to use products after several rounds of upgrades, it will become so rubbish? Why so many products, after upgrading to better and better products or services is extremely lacking?

The reason why a product can be called a good product first depends on the product's vision goal, followed by product design core design concept, and finally is the product design and implementation.

It is relatively easy to make a good product at a certain stage, only the core functions provided by the product can meet the needs of the user. However, in a time-to-time versioning, it is always a good product to keep up with the times Difficulties, especially in the face of changes and temptations: changes in product strategy, changes in product teams, changes in users, changes in competitive landscapes, etc., and the temptations in the process of change. All these changes and temptations may lead to product vision goals, core design concepts and details design changes in the process of product upgrade, eventually leading to the failure of product upgrade.

Changes in the company's overall product strategy may lead to changes in the position of a product in the company, affecting the product's strategy, positioning, strategy, etc., and the impact of such changes on a product may be fatal. In the case of Google Reader, Google's recent socialization strategy is Google +, so all products, including Google Reader, Gmail, and more must all be tuned around integrating with Google+. This led to a revision of Reader in the social share of the larger adjustments. For the so-called synergies between products, how many products destroyed a bright future.

The former responsible for product leaving or no longer responsible for the so-called "not break", the new people always have to deny and push the original product design impulse, so as to reflect the value of their work, and the new vision of the product, most of the design philosophy Own a set of methodology, so in the new version of the product design will use its own methodology to refactor the product, so even though only the old version of the upgrade, but the product team, design concepts have long been changed.

Related to the product team also includes the ability of newcomers, feelings of the product, enthusiasm and other reasons.

With the rapid increase in the number of users, the user base also fission, all kinds of users made a seemingly reasonable needs of all kinds. In order to meet the needs of different user groups, the product constantly new features, more and more bloated products. At the same time, due to the maturity of the market and changes in the competitive landscape, the choice of the target user base is no longer a single one, and the user's expectation of the product has also changed. The original criteria for measuring good products may have changed, in which case all product upgrades face the challenge of changing or not changing. How to keep pace with the times? How to balance different users' needs and expectations?

In order to maintain their competitive edge, the focus of the product is no longer concerned with how to better meet the needs of users, and is no longer to maintain their own pace and because of competitor's killings, especially competitors launched similar competitive products The unique style continues to evolve. Instead of focusing on what competitors are doing and scrambling for each other, one new version of it that is more or less identical to its competitors is being rolled out. The end product becomes rubbish without vitality and soul.

Even with the same product team, the new and old versions may be far from quality in terms of the success of the old version. There are many reasons. A typical situation is that in the old version, due to the limited resources, the team was not allowed to have too many ideas. Therefore, all kinds of temptations must be resisted to focus on the most important core functions. In addition, The success of extreme hunger, we also have the enthusiasm for the product and the common goal.

After success, resources are no longer the biggest issue. Various "great ideas" that have been suppressed for a long time due to factors such as resources, time and capital are now coming to an end. All these directions are opportunities, all of which are competition barriers for our competitors. Specific, concise has become synonymous with conservative, platform, diversification, one-stop new team terminology.

The success of the previous version, in our country as the only standard to defeat the kings, successfully cover up all the problems of the team, infinite tilt company resources, the desire of leaders also expanded dramatically, and the team goal is no longer a single, successful Desire and passion are no longer as strong as before. Team ownership and being given more expectations, more resources, more commitment, more internal friction, more chaos, the end result is a more rotten product. We can call such phenomena "successful side effects."

How to avoid trash traps after the product upgrade, in fact, there is no standard answer. In fact, many of the above problems are not absolutely right or wrong points, but the degree of control problems, the same reasoning in different situations right or wrong is not the same.

Therefore, the crux of the problem is actually how to find a suitable balance between product goals, team skills, team desires and rhythms so as to keep up with the times so as to cope with the ever-changing world. A team from one success to another more success requires more focused on the goal, a clear understanding of the ability of the team, the desire to effectively control and a reasonable sense of rhythm.

Source: http://www.yeeach.com