Resisting Change: iGoogle and Yahoo Profile Updates Shock Users
Our review of the new iGoogle homepage was generally positive. For a large number of users, however, the latest updates, including the stronger emphasis on the full-screen canvas view, were simply unacceptable. Just this weekend, the New York Times reported about the difficulties of making drastic changes to popular web sites without alienating users. Judging from the reaction of some of iGoogle's users, Google's switch to the new iGoogle layout is a textbook example for how not to update a popular product. If Google had made these changes incrementally instead of foisting a completely new version of iGoogle onto its users without warning, it could have surely prevented the current outrage.
User Reactions
In many ways, the reactions from Google's users are quite typical. As Lou Cabron points out, since Google updated iGoogle, its users have started the obligatory online petition that urges Google to allow users to keep the old version of iGoogle, created Greasemonkey scripts to roll the layout back themselves, and started a Facebook group that protests 'forced website redesigns' in general.
On Google's own discussion board, users posted the phone numbers and email addresses of a number of Google engineers and product mangers involved in the iGoogle project.
Most users especially disliked the move of the tabs from the top of the page into a sidebar on the left of the screen.
Not Just Google: Yahoo Profiles
Google was not the only company suffering from this over the weekend. While the New York Times lauded Yahoo for only making small, incremental changes to its homepage, Yahoo's radical switch to a new profile page (while also resetting everybody's profile at the same time) upset quite a few of its users. Yahoo's own blog post about the switch has over 600 negative comments.
Give Users the Option to Go Back
Users, for many reasons, tend to resist change. Even though it is often only a very vocal minority that really takes issue with these changes, companies need to take these complaints seriously.
As more software moves into the cloud, one of the most lauded aspects of cloud computing - the fact that a company can quickly make updates to a product - can now also become a publicity nightmare.
Microsoft, Yahoo, and Google usually allow users to use the old version of their more popular online products for a while after a new version is released. Lately, however, we have spoken to quite a few product managers who were quite adamant that their new product was so far superior to their old offering that they were planning to release it to all of their users without a roll-back option. Judging from the user reactions both Google and Yahoo saw over the weekend, it would seem that they do so at their own peril.
Share
Comments
Subscribe to comments for this post OR Subscribe to comments for all ReadWriteWeb posts
I like the fact that yahoo Mail has the option to use both the new Ajax interface and the old version (for slower computers). And this is available even after a while they've launched the new interface.
Why they didn't do the same with Yahoo profiles beats me...maybe having two versions cost them more? I can understand Yahoo given their struggle to stay alive but Google almighty??
With packaged software, publishers created new versions to sell boxes. Generally, web software changes on the fly, in small increment - perpetual beta.
The current trend by Google, Facebook, Myspace, and Yahoo to release many changes as a new user interface has created turmoil. As a long-time software developer, I've also been annoyed to re-learn something, especially when the new interface delivers no immediate benefit.
The Facebook change simplified panels and integrated wall posts directly into the news feed - creating a twitter-like feed that is organized by topic. For users, we first noticed that links to features have been moved - the negative. More recently, users are discovering the wall post on news feeds - the benefit.
Yahoo destroyed the old profiles. The benefit is to connect mail contacts using social network features. The problem is that with the negative publicity for Yahoo, why would users invite their friends to connect?
Sites are wise to return to the web 2.0 approach to rapidly, quietly make incremental changes. Bloggers do that with new, removed, moved widgets - very few complaints.
-Dash
As a simple potato you can imagine my horror when Yahoo changed their "My Yahoo" page. Baking at 350 for 1/2 hour has never been the same. And the My Yahoo page has never worked as well for me.
I think some companies feel compelled to change before all the bugs are worked out. Buy using a sack of taters as their guieny pigs is not a good way to conduct business.
I have no idea what Yahoo changed since I do not use Yahoo for anything.
The iGoogle page changes were a little disconcerting until I started using them. Most complaints were about the loss of screen real estate with the tabs on the left and I did not like that at first. The full canvas is a great tool.
Change is sooo hard.
Get over it. Changes are going to happen.
Keeping the old version and allowing user to switch back is a good option for users... but costly to manage.
* How to maintain 2 different frontend knowing frontend features are also linked to backend features ?
* What is the cost to QA the two frontends when delivering new features?
* How to deliver new features? Both versions, new one?
I think the wisest move is to beta test new release (that doesn't last forever), get some user feedback, listen to user feedback (at least evaluating what you think is good for the company vs what users say) and plan a global roll-out.
Resistance to change is part of our primate programming. If a path through the forest was safe and led to food, why wander off of it? Hence the adage, "if it ain't broke don't fix it."
Yet, microeconomic theory dictates a company must innovate to remain competitive. After the primary innovation (e.g., a user portal) what is left to do except "improve" it?
Sometimes change is beneficial and truly an improvement. Sometimes change is simply lip service intended to satisfy stakeholders (such as managers whose jobs depend on new product).
So the answer must be to implement innovative new products only when the marker demands it. But what products and when?
Marketers of conventional products solved this problem a long time ago. Surveys, focus groups and limited release prototypes are basic tools that can help prevent flubs and flops. Why megacompanies such as Google and Yahoo don't or won't use such tools is the real question to be asked.
Sorry, "only when the market demands it."
When people depends on these giants, they're in the mercy of the companies and their future "strategic" directions. If they plan to roll out something new and the legacy system has to disappear. There is little you can do to prevent it.
That puts an emphasis on data portability to move to another provider or build your own custom solution.
It looks as if the Yahoo Profile's update was for the best... spending just a couple of minutes with it, I was pleased. I doubt many will notice though. I was disappointed that they removed the original information in my profile that had been stagnant for several years.
Does anyone still use this section of Yahoo? I thought I was one of the last to even use their instant messenger... aside from all the spam bots that contact me on a regular basis.
Keeping a roll-back option is expensive, I'm sure. Besides, the new designs usually integrate in new central features that are not accessible via the old design and likely fix bugs. Even worse, leaving users with the ability to roll back means that the company will have to support the old design.
Let's get a handle on things here, this is getting ridiculous, this is the Internet. Things change all the time and will continue to, they either need to suck it up and get with the program, or they can go off an use one of the many other services that do almost the exact same thing.
Whining never solves anything.
Yes, change does happen all the time on the internet. However, I think the biggest outcry regarding the new Yahoo profiles is not with the change itself, but with the fact that:
a) Users' profile information disappeared
b) It was done with no warning whatsoever
If Yahoo had even just done the first thing...migrated the data to the new profiles, I would bet you there would be far less of an outcry.
The changes in iGoogle seem to be really improving it. Unfortunately, the fullscreen mode does not yer work for the German language version.
I don't really understand what the fuss is about. How many older versions of an application is a company supposed to offer to its users in oder to keep everybody happy? Imagine the uproar when the next version will be launched... Then the fans of the current one will be offended and want it back.
One of the many changes to Yahoo profiles is that Yahoo set the default so that they are private. That is a big change. No one will see your shiny new profile, no matter how spiffy you make it, unless you set it to public. And you have to wade through a mass of new screens to figure out how to do that, and the average user either can't or won't. Personally, I think they just defeated the entire purpose of having or using profiles with that one.
The new igoogle homepage is awful. What a waste of space --- contrary to the "no cluttler" google that I'm used to.
I received the new igoogle page on 10-17-2008. I even tried some of the GreaseMonkey scripts for Firefox 3 but I didn't really like them. On 10-21-2008 I had a problem with my WinXP OS and I reinstalled it via a week old image. Now for almost two days I have my old iGoogle page back.
Has Google changed their minds about letting users choose which iGoogle page they want?
I have no issue with igoogle's changes, then again, I wasn't terrbily invested in the way it was either. It still does everything, they just moved some stuff, and oh well. Gmail now loads in teh same screen, which would be okay except it has reduced funtiuonality, and I then have to spend a click to do anything but the basics with an e-mail. Meh.
Yahoo, on the other hand, has not only the 600 angry comments on the profiles page, but a good 300 on Yahoo Groups, and about 150 on Messenger blogs. Yahoo News recently did exactly the same thing, modernizing change, no announcement, reduced functionality, gawdaful appearance, absurd features, no opt out. Lots of user threats to leave in all cases. Go look at the suggestion board for news. Or toolbar when it first came out. Or Groups when they rolled out their last really stupid idea. Or when more ads came to Yahoo Mail, and even to paying SBC users. The point is more that in Yahoo's case, its a pattern users are perceieving as disrespectful. Long term users seem to often be heard saying: "I've been with Yahoo for X years, but this does it, I'm outta here."
Once, maybe twice is forgivable. 11hundred times across multiple products? That's a pattern, people notice it, and they will eventually move on. Enough to sway things badly? I guess we'll wait and see. Jim fancies "metrics" rather than satisfaction, so I guess we'll see who wins out. At least the folks at Yahoo Groups seem to get it. They recently asked users for feedback on how to best fix the abandoned groups problem (finally)! That's pretty smart, I think.
Upgrades I think is necessary for companies especially when it comes to Yahoo and Google. But options of using version should be available for slower computers, or the upgrades should be considerable for applications of all computer models...
The new Yahoo profile is the last in a long line of blatantly incompetent and amateurish changes Yahoo has made to its products.
And it's going to hammer the final nail in the coffin of this once great company.
Yahoo has so thoroughly and completely alienated most of its userbase, and they are just not going to stand for it anymore.
Over the last 3 years I have witnessed a huge exodus from Yahoo Messenger and Yahoo Chat. This will make it final.
Yahoo is a dead puppy. And it deserves to be.
What a shame.
Yahoo not only changed the format, but they wiped out all the profiles associated with "aliases" other then the main screen name. In some cases, users had created various profiles for those aliases for purposes of humor, or "halloween costumes" etc. By wiping out such profiles, yahoo destroyed user created content that could not be replicated unless said users had saved a copy somewhere (which I did not). If yahoo had at least given some warning of the change to come, it would have provided time to copy down any informatin the user wished to save. I have no problem with change, but I do have a problem with seeing my time and effort wiped away.
I hate the Fact that yahoo changed again.. thrown away my profile without any warning, my history of yahoo and my presious picture with my boyfriend has gone.. i hate to create a new profile on yahoo it is not my favourite website anymore :(
Yahoo does not care about its users one bit, and this new profile idiocy is the last straw. I will never again go to ANY yahoo page, and am switching my email and deleting my Yahoo account. I suggest others do the same and boycott this evil corporation entirely.