|
|
|
|
|
by pm24601
4779 days ago
|
|
Doing that "minor feature" considerations (in my rough order of importance): 1. will that feature be used by the target market that will pay money? 2. what else isn't being done? 3. security holes 4. latent bug triggering ( testing and test cases ) 5. UX issues (where to put the checkbox ) 6. Documentation - possible confusion ( harder than you think in many cases - I go through a lot to eliminate things from UI so I don't have to explain them) 7. possible premium feature |
|
But in tinder's case, the addition of age preferences in matches is similar to their already-existing gender & location search for a couple reasons... 1) they already check a potential match's gender (and location) against the gender preference you chose, so while they're there, how much harder is to check another attribute of that match? his/her age, 2) they already have the matching preferences / UI setup (yes, decisions still have to be made about where to put a slider, but it shouldn't look too different from the distance preference slider, and it's not such a new feature that it would be confusing to the user), and 3) since they don't currently make money off their user base, tinder's main value is derived from # users, # active users, etc. There could be an argument to be made about making it a possible premium feature, but bringing in more users / giving users what they want / making them happy should be the focus.
I guess when it comes down to it, I just don't understand how the development process of similar feature could take so long.