Recent Widgets


Register for DashboardWidgets

Recent Forums Posts

Partners


iCompositions

MacDesktops.net

RSS Showcase
RSS Comments
RSS Forums

This forum is locked: you cannot post, reply to, or edit topics.   This topic is locked: you cannot edit posts or make replies. Posted in: Comments and Suggestions

Widgets sorted by number of updates?


Poll Results: Would you appreciate widgets sorted by # of updates in addition to the current ratings, downloads, and date options?
YES
22%
 22%  [ 2 ]
NO
66%
 66%  [ 6 ]
MAYBE
11%
 11%  [ 1 ]
It depends...(please clarify by replying in the thread)
0%
 0%  [ 0 ]
Total Votes : 9

Author Message
BagOfHammers



Joined: 03 Jul 2005
Posts: 167
Location: under the lucky hippo tree

Posted: Fri Jul 22, 2005 - 12:03 pm    Post subject: Widgets sorted by number of updates? Reply with quote

Of course, it would be hard to put widgets in order of version number accurately because of people using letters or having different standards (some widgets that are incomplete are called 1.0, for example).

But couldn't this be worked around by ordering them according to the number of updates, descending? Say, a widget that has been updated 10 times placed before one that has been updated 9 times? Of course, it won't be perfect, as there are differences in the amount of improvement in each update, but it should help anyway to sort widgets by their "completeness" or the author's level of effort, to some degree.

What thinkest thou?
View user's profile Send private message Widgets
BagOfHammers



Joined: 03 Jul 2005
Posts: 167
Location: under the lucky hippo tree

Posted: Tue Jul 26, 2005 - 1:19 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Wow...split right down the middle! Too early to tell, I'd think, though.
View user's profile Send private message Widgets
cerberus



Joined: 20 Jun 2005
Posts: 118

Posted: Tue Jul 26, 2005 - 8:33 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

OMG

So my next widget already has "2.0" features I just added and it is not released.. 2.0 features are things that were not in the original design but were requested by beta testers. Now I can release 1.0 and really draw this out... I can get a lot of publicity by making an update every few days until I get to the magic "2.0"... How many intermediate updates would you like ? and should any of them have bugs that can be magically fixed in another quick update that follows...?! ...It will be so dramatic for my users to consider how difficult programming can be, and yet how responsive and clever and how fast I can fix anything and add new features at blinding speed....so people are like .. "wow, what will he think of tomorrow !" and sort of follow the daily improvements... like a serial drama.

But then again maybe it is best for the programmer's reputation and for the users' productivity... if 1.0 versions are well sorted to begin with. Then once 1.0 is released, the programmer can concentrate more on new projects. So far, I prefer this strategy.

cerberus
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website Widgets
BagOfHammers



Joined: 03 Jul 2005
Posts: 167
Location: under the lucky hippo tree

Posted: Thu Jul 28, 2005 - 4:45 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

???

Obviously, I didn't expect it to be used THAT way. That would be rather stupid, now wouldn't it? It's just cheating the users. Further, isn't that more trouble than it's worth, faking updates? The version number doesn't matter, because the number of updates would be counted, not guessed according to version number.

I'm strictly speaking of from a user-end perspective, because, that's what I am, a user. It would be nice to see widgets that have been updated regularly as a fairly decent indication of the degree to which they are being improved or how frequently they are being improved. Not necessarily an exact correlation, as you point out, but realistically, how many developers are going to fake updates just to go towards the top of the list? If you are trying to indicate that this would'nt be a PERFECT system, I have news for you! Neither is the "ratings" sorting either, especially because of the variance in how many reviews are done on each widget.

Really, would people exploit the system, taking on that much more effort, JUST to appear before other widgets? You *could* also ask friends and family to vote favorably for your own widgets, but would that be worth it? I rather think that is unrealistic, but maybe I have an optimistic view on the nature of developers?

I'm simply saying that there should be some way of looking for widgets that have probably had a lot of work put into them, in terms of fixing bugs or fitting user suggestions...no, it won't be a perfect system, but I'd like to point out that right now there is NO system.

But, at the time of this post, more people are against than for. I'm curious as to how many of these votes were because they were concerned about such cheaters.... My personal opinion is obviously that things should be done with the mainstream in mind, not the cheaters. Or are the cheaters the mainstream? Sure hope not.
View user's profile Send private message Widgets
Ludge



Joined: 09 May 2005
Posts: 98
Location: UK

Posted: Thu Jul 28, 2005 - 6:58 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

BagOfHammers wrote:
?My personal opinion is obviously that things should be done with the mainstream in mind, not the cheaters. Or are the cheaters the mainstream? Sure hope not.


You are showing a little ignorance here I'm afraid.

Sure we can do it for the mainstream, but then one or two cheaters can abuse it, thereby wrecking the setup for the mainstream users. See, three cheaters out of several hundred would fill the top row of the showcase. See the flaw here?
_________________
BatteryInfo widget
AdiumList widget.
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website AIM Address Widgets
BagOfHammers



Joined: 03 Jul 2005
Posts: 167
Location: under the lucky hippo tree

Posted: Thu Jul 28, 2005 - 8:42 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Yes...sure. But will that really be worth the time? You end up having to make several updates anyway. I see your point though. Would having a ratings thing go along it help?

In my case, it is extremely unlikely that the top 3 will all interest me anyway. For me, it's ok if the update system is accurate in general, even if the top few are cheaters. I would imagine that already, people who update more frequently show up more in the recent widgets column. But, that at least is an incentive to update. So even a slightly inaccurate system could still separate those that haven't been updated much, and, sooner or later the developers will run out of updates. Maybe it should be a listing according to number of updates and time since the first upload. That way, users could see widgets that have been worked on not only frequently, but for a long time.

I didn't know so many people would be eager to cheat...of course, either the admins or the users could combat this with some comments or even recounting the number of uploads.

I don't know...maybe making just ratings would indeed spawn too much cheating. Would it be better to have it as a sub-sorting kind of thing, like being the determinant of what widgets come first within the "ratings" sorting? That makes it a lot harder to cheat, at least not very easy to get to the top of the list....

I still think that the cheaters should be dealt with on the side, not be a primary consideration... Is it really that likely that someone would work so hard just to cheat the system? What's the process of updating a widget like? Isn't there a way for users and commenters to weed such cheaters out from the top 3?
View user's profile Send private message Widgets
This forum is locked: you cannot post, reply to, or edit topics.   This topic is locked: you cannot edit posts or make replies.

 
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2002 phpBB Group