Does anyone ever get a reply on any bug submitted to Apple? With one exception, I get the someone else reported it or it stays open with no comments from Apple.
I have only one bug they ever put the need more information generic text and that has no followup since I followed their instructions, not even a "you did it correctly, thanks".
That's a good reason not to include a given feature, or at least to allow it to be turned off. Someone at Apple obviously thought it was a good idea, but they clearly didn't ask very many other people, or ask any cyclists at all.
However, some people would actually like that, me for instance. On Firefox, about:config is a great feature: if you know what you're doing, you can tweak any setting that's tweakable.
> prefer the device to do its best to guess at the correct setting
This is actually the worst of both worlds. From a UX perspective, I can understand having multiple behaviors with a setting, and I can also understand having a single behavior with no setting. However, I can't agree with having multiple behaviors that change opaquely at the whim of the machine (like in this case), which is just frustrating.
At the very least, Apple should have surfaced a setting to developers to control this and made it opt-in.
That said, I do wish they'd make it a bit more organised than a long list of tersely named options; perhaps a tree view like many other apps' settings use.
The idea of providing good defaults, and that of providing rich configuration options, are not necessarily opposites.
One or two sentences of description per variable/valid option would go a long way as well.
"Siri, why do you think I'm walking in the middle of the road?"
"Oh, I'm sorry -- you're not driving a car? Would you like me to stop snapping your position into the middle of the road, then?"
It could be that the requirements specification for the program requires these falsehoods. In that case, the specification has a bug.