Facebook still a battery hog

[Mefisto]

Did they listen when we asked for the integral messaging app to be reinstated? No, and we have repeatedly asked. Just look at the consistent one star reviews for FB in the App Store. They're so sneaky that they 'update' the app every couple of weeks in order to reset all the negative reviews. Oh and whilst we're at it, their failure to list what the updates contain and address is disgusting too. Facebook are just a shoddy company.

This is something that has been quite curious to me for some time (and also kind of off topic, but what the hell). I mean I get that some people don't like the fact that the messenger functionality was removed from the Facebook app, but why blast the two apps (or only either one of them) with 1 star reviews because of this (not saying that the person I quoted necessarily does this, but AppStore reviews speak for themselves)? As I understand it 1 star reviews mean that the app has some inherent problems / bugs that severely impact the user experience, and for the life of me I really can't see that as being the case here. Both of the apps (well, at least the Messenger app) work just like they are supposed to (or at least pretty close to it), albeit separate from one another. Now, if there were show stopping bugs, I would get it but as it stands, I merely remain amused and, frankly, a little puzzled.

And people wonder why they update their software every couple of weeks thus flushing reviews that basically say nothing about the software itself.

The bolded part of the quote (my emphasis) I wholeheartedly agree with. This "We'll highlight the changes in the app"-thing isn't really that well thought out.

 

[sunking101]

This is something that has been quite curious to me for some time (and also kind of off topic, but what the hell). I mean I get that some people don't like the fact that the messenger functionality was removed from the Facebook app, but why blast the two apps (or only either one of them) with 1 star reviews because of this (not saying that the person I quoted necessarily does this, but AppStore reviews speak for themselves)? As I understand it 1 star reviews mean that the app has some inherent problems / bugs that severely impact the user experience, and for the life of me I really can't see that as being the case here. Both of the apps (well, at least the Messenger app) work just like they are supposed to (or at least pretty close to it), albeit separate from one another. Now, if there were show stopping bugs, I would get it but as it stands, I merely remain amused and, frankly, a little puzzled.

And people wonder why they update their software every couple of weeks thus flushing reviews that basically say nothing about the software itself.

The bolded part of the quote (my emphasis) I wholeheartedly agree with. This "We'll highlight the changes in the app"-thing isn't really that well thought out.

They do though. The reviews constantly slate the jumbled up newsfeed and missing friends' posts. Anyone sane would choose the 'most recent' option and have that as the default, but with Facebook you had to go into the menus to request this and even then the setting was erased if you closed the app. Now they have removed the setting completely and replaced it with an ineffective 'favourites' format.

As for the separate messenger app, why do we need it? Why should we have to install two different apps where previously one was sufficient? Swapping between apps is ridiculous and there has to be some strange motive behind it which has never been adequately explained.

Finally, the app has always been a battery hog and now it's proven via iOS9 usage stats.
It's high time that a competitor came onto the scene like FB did when My Space was the top dog (and whilst we're at it let's have one for Ebay too).

 

[C DM]

This is something that has been quite curious to me for some time (and also kind of off topic, but what the hell). I mean I get that some people don't like the fact that the messenger functionality was removed from the Facebook app, but why blast the two apps (or only either one of them) with 1 star reviews because of this (not saying that the person I quoted necessarily does this, but AppStore reviews speak for themselves)? As I understand it 1 star reviews mean that the app has some inherent problems / bugs that severely impact the user experience, and for the life of me I really can't see that as being the case here. Both of the apps (well, at least the Messenger app) work just like they are supposed to (or at least pretty close to it), albeit separate from one another. Now, if there were show stopping bugs, I would get it but as it stands, I merely remain amused and, frankly, a little puzzled.

And people wonder why they update their software every couple of weeks thus flushing reviews that basically say nothing about the software itself.

The bolded part of the quote (my emphasis) I wholeheartedly agree with. This "We'll highlight the changes in the app"-thing isn't really that well thought out.

A few potential explanations are there for all those things.

Negative reviews are often from people who have issues with the service itself and not necessarily the app--ranging from people having issues with their accounts, to people having issues with Facebook itself, to other things. Sure, there are those who have actual issues with the app itself as well, but it's hard to say how many of those there really are when they are mixed in with a whole lot of complaining about other things.

As far as updates every few weeks without any real release notes, it's more than likely that Facebook, like many software companies, is working using an Agile methodology to their development and releases, meaning they work on certain features and bugs in a period of a few weeks (a sprint), and whatever gets done at that time and is in good enough shape to go out that gets released at the end of that sprint. That's essentially what's likely behind a new release every few weeks.

When it comes to release notes, there are probably a few things in play there, one is that sometimes it takes time and effort to gather up everything that was actually done in a sprint and then have it go through legal/PR for approval to be posted up, which would delay the release until all that is done, rather having it out the door right when the sprint is done. Not really an excuse, but a potential explanation.

Perhaps an even more likely one that might be playing more of a role is that Facebook releases features to users in buckets--basically some people will get some new feature before others, others might get a different one before others, and others still might get one that ultimately they don't decide to release to more people or at all and remove it from some of the ones they made it available to. It's sort of along the lines of bucket or A/B testing that quite a few companies do. It can make it hard to say what new features are there when not everyone gets them, and those who do might have somewhat different ones than some others.

 

[Mefisto]

They do though. The reviews constantly slate the jumbled up newsfeed and missing friends' posts. Anyone sane would choose the 'most recent' option and have that as the default, but with Facebook you had to go into the menus to request this and even then the setting was erased if you closed the app. Now they have removed the setting completely and replaced it with an ineffective 'favourites' format.

As for the separate messenger app, why do we need it? Why should we have to install two different apps where previously one was sufficient? Swapping between apps is ridiculous and there has to be some strange motive behind it which has never been adequately explained.

Finally, the app has always been a battery hog and now it's proven via iOS9 usage stats.
It's high time that a competitor came onto the scene like FB did when My Space was the top dog (and whilst we're at it let's have one for Ebay too).

Your 1st and 3rd paragraphs I agree with. The 2nd one though, not really a matter or "why should / do we / you / I need it etc.". It's a choice, really. They decided to do this, and the user either rolls with the punches or doesn't. This was my point regarding the AppStore reviews; things changed (not necessarily for the better, but hey, such is life), but the functionality remained, although changed, ie. separate from the FB-app, and in my opinion that alone doesn't warrant 1 star reviews for the Messenger app.

Then again, this could very well be the norm in which these kinds of matters are dealt with, and I just haven't encountered it before. I for one prefer to have the apps separate, but at the same time can understand how it could irk some users.

A few potential explanations are there for all those things.

Negative reviews are often from people who have issues with the service itself and not necessarily the app--ranging from people having issues with their accounts, to people having issues with Facebook itself, to other things. Sure, there are those who have actual issues with the app itself as well, but it's hard to say how many of those there really are when they are mixed in with a whole lot of complaining about other things.

As far as updates every few weeks without any real release notes, it's more than likely that Facebook, like many software companies, is working using an Agile methodology to their development and releases, meaning they work on certain features and bugs in a period of a few weeks (a sprint), and whatever gets done at that time and is in good enough shape to go out that gets released at the end of that sprint. That's essentially what's likely behind a new release every few weeks.

When it comes to release notes, there are probably a few things in play there, one is that sometimes it takes time and effort to gather up everything that was actually done in a sprint and then have it go through legal/PR for approval to be posted up, which would delay the release until all that is done, rather having it out the door right when the sprint is done. Not really an excuse, but a potential explanation.

Perhaps an even more likely one that might be playing more of a role is that Facebook releases features to users in buckets--basically some people will get some new feature before others, others might get a different one before others, and others still might get one that ultimately they don't decide to release to more people or at all and remove it from some of the ones they made it available to. It's sort of along the lines of bucket or A/B testing that quite a few companies do. It can make it hard to say what new features are there when not everyone gets them, and those who do might have somewhat different ones than some others.

Good stuff, especially that last paragraph. Thanks. I knew they did that with new features (roll them out in phases) but it still had somehow escaped me at the time I was writing.

 

[Gryfter]

Stop using the facebook app and go on the damn site through Safari or whichever your browser of choice...problem solved!!!

I deleted the facebook app over 4 years ago and never looked back. Never had all these issues people are mentioning.

 

[GreyOS]

you can use messenger without a facebook account, that's one reason for them to be separate.

 

[sunking101]

you can use messenger without a facebook account, that's one reason for them to be separate.

Why on earth would you want to though?

 

[C DM]

Why on earth would you want to though?

Because you communicate with people who are on it but you don't really use Facebook itself?

 

[sunking101]

Because you communicate with people who are on it but you don't really use Facebook itself?

Why not use SMS, Whatsapp, iMessage, email, Facetime or phonecalls? If you're not on Facebook yourself then why would you choose a Facebook app to contact folk?

 

[C DM]

Why not use SMS, Whatsapp, iMessage, email, Facetime or phonecalls? If you're not on Facebook yourself then why would you choose a Facebook app to contact folk?

Because that's what some other folks that you want to talk to might be using?

 

[sunking101]

Because that's what some other folks that you want to talk to might be using?

How would you know that if you hadn't got a Facebook account and why would you care what they're using? FB messenger is hardly the 'go to' when it comes to messaging apps, or communication for that matter. So you're saying that if the messaging app was still a part of the main FB app, that you would open a FB account against your wishes just so that you could keep in touch with people who refuse to use any other means of keeping in touch with you? It makes no sense to me.

 

[C DM]

How would you know that if you hadn't got a Facebook account and why would you care what they're using? FB messenger is hardly the 'go to' when it comes to messaging apps, or communication for that matter. So you're saying that if the messaging app was still a part of the main FB app, that you would open a FB account against your wishes just so that you could keep in touch with people who refuse to use any other means of keeping in touch with you? It makes no sense to me.

Not really any different to installing and signing up for something like WhatsApp because some people you know are using it as their main means of messaging. As comes up in many WhatsApp threads that seems like a fairly normal and rational use case. Applies the same basic way here as well.

 

[sunking101]

Not really any different to installing and signing up for something like WhatsApp because some people you know are using it as their main means of messaging. As comes up in many WhatsApp threads that seems like a fairly normal and rational use case. Applies the same basic way here as well.

I still don't see the point of using FB messenger if you don't use FB. I do use FB fleetingly and I still refuse to install their messenger app. If I get a message on there I go to the website to view it. Nobody is bloating up my system with unnecessary apps.

 

[C DM]

I still don't see the point of using FB messenger if you don't use FB. I do use FB fleetingly and I still refuse to install their messenger app. If I get a message on there I go to the website to view it. Nobody is bloating up my system with unnecessary apps.

Again, same concept of having WhatsApp messenger because someone you talk to uses it even if you don't care about it or use it otherwise.

 

[sunking101]

Again, same concept of having WhatsApp messenger because someone you talk to uses it even if you don't care about it or use it otherwise.

I disagree.
Whatsapp is a recognised communications tool, whereas FB Messenger is an extension of Facebook and surely only used by Facebook peeps. If someone refused to communicate with me, when asked, unless it was on Facebook then I would decline unless I already used Facebook. If someone refused to communicate with me other than by Whatsapp then I wouldn't mind at all, because lots of people use Whatsapp as an alternative to SMS messaging. It's a recognised communications tool.

Like I said, I do dip into FB occasionally and it does have some value but I sure as hell won't be downloading their messenger app as a means of communicating with folk. Don't FB own Whatsapp anyway? So why bring another standalone comms app into the marketplace? I tend to hold FB in a worse light than I hold Google...

 

[C DM]

I disagree.
Whatsapp is a recognised communications tool, whereas FB Messenger is an extension of Facebook and surely only used by Facebook peeps. If someone refused to communicate with me, when asked, unless it was on Facebook then I would decline unless I already used Facebook. If someone refused to communicate with me other than by Whatsapp then I wouldn't mind at all, because lots of people use Whatsapp as an alternative to SMS messaging. It's a recognised communications tool.

Like I said, I do dip into FB occasionally and it does have some value but I sure as hell won't be downloading their messenger app as a means of communicating with folk. Don't FB own Whatsapp anyway? So why bring another standalone comms app into the marketplace? I tend to hold FB in a worse light than I hold Google...

What WhatsApp is to you is Facebook Messenger for someone else.

 

[dlevines]

Facebook pretends to be a VoIP app and gets extra background execution time because of that.

Technically this is not allowed but Apple has a real hard time enforcing its rules against Facebook because if they pull it from the app store, 95% of iPhone owners will raise hell.

This sort of **** is why I've stopped using the app, and only occasionally check Facebook using Safari. I'm not a heavy FB user, though; I can see why heavy FB users would be pissed off about this.

.
Facebook needs to remember its place I think. Even more reason more me to neglect my FB account. I need all the battery life I can get.

 

[uhaas]

As far as updates every few weeks without any real release notes, it's more than likely that Facebook, like many software companies, is working using an Agile methodology to their development and releases, meaning they work on certain features and bugs in a period of a few weeks (a sprint), and whatever gets done at that time and is in good enough shape to go out that gets released at the end of that sprint. That's essentially what's likely behind a new release every few weeks.

When it comes to release notes, there are probably a few things in play there, one is that sometimes it takes time and effort to gather up everything that was actually done in a sprint and then have it go through legal/PR for approval to be posted up, which would delay the release until all that is done, rather having it out the door right when the sprint is done. Not really an excuse, but a potential explanation.

Perhaps an even more likely one that might be playing more of a role is that Facebook releases features to users in buckets--basically some people will get some new feature before others, others might get a different one before others, and others still might get one that ultimately they don't decide to release to more people or at all and remove it from some of the ones they made it available to. It's sort of along the lines of bucket or A/B testing that quite a few companies do. It can make it hard to say what new features are there when not everyone gets them, and those who do might have somewhat different ones than some others.

As well, since they are such a massive platform with a huge user base, they may want to also add some new features without advertising them. I imagine they get hacker attacks more than many first world governments. New features would be the first target, trying to hit less mature holes in the platform.

 

[Manatlt]

I still don't see the point of using FB messenger if you don't use FB. I do use FB fleetingly and I still refuse to install their messenger app. If I get a message on there I go to the website to view it. Nobody is bloating up my system with unnecessary apps.

I see a huge point. I hate the bloated, battery hogging, storage hungry Facebook app that you like to keep on your phone.

Messenger is a light app that has a lot of features, push notifications and easy to keep in touch with folks. If I want to use FB, I'll use Safari.

The FB app is bloated enough as it is, yet you want the messenger back in?

Facebook has different teams for the main iOS app and Messenger, so they'll never combine the both of them again anyway.

 

[rctlr]

Back topic. The Facebook app still drains more than expected on my iPhone 5s.
It still needs looking at.

 

[JoeyD74]

I reinstalled the app this week, still sucking down the battery, deleted it again.

 

[Trickhot3102]

Glad people are still angry about this! I wrote a negative review of the app on the App Store saying to fix the battery drain issue. I REALLY hope this gets fixed soon! If enough people complain, it'll get fixed.

 

[sunking101]

Glad people are still angry about this! I wrote a negative review of the app on the App Store saying to fix the battery drain issue. I REALLY hope this gets fixed soon! If enough people complain, it'll get fixed.

Complaining but still using the app doesn't affect Facebook. Their advertising revenue will only be hit if people stop using the app and website. People have complained for many months about 'most recent' newsfeed layout and the separate messaging app, but they continue to use them. Therefore FB do nothing about it.

 

[drea97]

The battery draining faster on my iPad Air it's sucks.

 

[Trickhot3102]

Complaining but still using the app doesn't affect Facebook. Their advertising revenue will only be hit if people stop using the app and website. People have complained for many months about 'most recent' newsfeed layout and the separate messaging app, but they continue to use them. Therefore FB do nothing about it.

Well That sucks. Unfortunately I cannot stand the alternatives to the FB app. Tried to use "friendly" and I couldn't stand it.