Talk:MyFitnessPal regressive upgrade: Difference between revisions
Latest comment: 5 November 2025 by Jmorgannz in topic To what extent is this anti-consumer, vs just being a skill issue from the company?
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
== To what extent is this anti-consumer, vs just being a skill issue from the company? == | ==To what extent is this anti-consumer, vs just being a skill issue from the company?== | ||
There's a good level of detail here (and i've removed the stub notice as such) but having read through it I'm left wondering to what extent this is an anti-consumer issue as opposed to a simple case of a product update being bad. it doesn't sound like they are refusing refunds, or otherwise doing anything beyond pushing a bad update (and moving free features to paid is also not really anti-consumer on account of free users not having paid anything in the first place). | There's a good level of detail here (and i've removed the stub notice as such) but having read through it I'm left wondering to what extent this is an anti-consumer issue as opposed to a simple case of a product update being bad. it doesn't sound like they are refusing refunds, or otherwise doing anything beyond pushing a bad update (and moving free features to paid is also not really anti-consumer on account of free users not having paid anything in the first place). | ||
I suppose the strongest case for this article's relevance is that subscribers had something they bought made worse by the company after they bought it (although presumably the users would actually be expecting the service to change, just only in ways they liked) but this is weakened on account of it being a subscription rather than a purchase. [[User:Keith|Keith]] ([[User talk:Keith|talk]]) 18:03, 5 November 2025 (UTC) | I suppose the strongest case for this article's relevance is that subscribers had something they bought made worse by the company after they bought it (although presumably the users would actually be expecting the service to change, just only in ways they liked) but this is weakened on account of it being a subscription rather than a purchase. [[User:Keith|Keith]] ([[User talk:Keith|talk]]) 18:03, 5 November 2025 (UTC) | ||
:Hi Keith, | |||
:I haven't finished it yet - I suffer from quite severe health conditions so I have to work on it iteratively. | |||
:Yes I agree the first pass it's not obvious what the consumer abuse is. It leans too far into "I didn't like the update" | |||
:I will be working on that to fix it - the issue is squarely that they rug pulled critical features that paid long term subscribers depend on, without which their workflow becomes not just hard, actually completely impossible.. so they are stuck sitting on their thumbs, unable to use the product while the dev team says "please wait" | |||
:So a paid service has suddenly become completely unusable - due to removed required features, and an interface that is so sluggish that it is literally not usable.. like its not slow.. it's unusable - and then the support team just gaslights, and refuses refunds. | |||
:You can see my own report for that: | |||
:https://mdbin.pages.dev/2hkttm [[User:Jmorgannz|Jmorgannz]] ([[User talk:Jmorgannz|talk]]) 22:40, 5 November 2025 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 22:40, 5 November 2025
To what extent is this anti-consumer, vs just being a skill issue from the company?
There's a good level of detail here (and i've removed the stub notice as such) but having read through it I'm left wondering to what extent this is an anti-consumer issue as opposed to a simple case of a product update being bad. it doesn't sound like they are refusing refunds, or otherwise doing anything beyond pushing a bad update (and moving free features to paid is also not really anti-consumer on account of free users not having paid anything in the first place).
I suppose the strongest case for this article's relevance is that subscribers had something they bought made worse by the company after they bought it (although presumably the users would actually be expecting the service to change, just only in ways they liked) but this is weakened on account of it being a subscription rather than a purchase. Keith (talk) 18:03, 5 November 2025 (UTC)
- Hi Keith,
- I haven't finished it yet - I suffer from quite severe health conditions so I have to work on it iteratively.
- Yes I agree the first pass it's not obvious what the consumer abuse is. It leans too far into "I didn't like the update"
- I will be working on that to fix it - the issue is squarely that they rug pulled critical features that paid long term subscribers depend on, without which their workflow becomes not just hard, actually completely impossible.. so they are stuck sitting on their thumbs, unable to use the product while the dev team says "please wait"
- So a paid service has suddenly become completely unusable - due to removed required features, and an interface that is so sluggish that it is literally not usable.. like its not slow.. it's unusable - and then the support team just gaslights, and refuses refunds.
- You can see my own report for that:
- https://mdbin.pages.dev/2hkttm Jmorgannz (talk) 22:40, 5 November 2025 (UTC)