Do you visit Youtube and Twitch other streaming services often? Focus on video decoding.
Do you visit sites that heavily utilize graphics[1]? Focus on 3D acceleration.
There are reasons this data can be useful, especially since Intel wants to unfuck their otherwise imperially fucked drivers. Websites aren't just plain text with window dressing anymore, they are entire programs unto themselves.
Should Creative also track my listening habits, to determine whether soundcard development resources need pooled into system sounds or MP3 decoding? Wouldn't that be a tad silly of them?
It seems a bit post-facto to me.
> Do you visit sites that heavily utilize graphics[1]? Focus on 3D acceleration.
This is almost cynical. Why not track your user's eyes and record the screen to see where or if visual fidelity at certain parts is necessary? You know, to optimize the architecture.
Coming soon to software near you!
The problem is, of course, that products seldom improve with use of telemetry, but that is beside the point.
That was followed up by asking if telemetry has value for the user. I answered it can.
The reality of products generally not improving with telemetry is beside the point. That is a problem with the people using the telemetric data.
I don't think that you did, though. The data that is gathered by monitoring what websites you go to can be obtained without monitoring what websites you go to. So why do they feel the need to monitor what sites you go to?
My answer to that is "marketing purposes".
If you're just going to discuss in bad faith, and I wouldn't be surprised since telemetry is always going to be criticized no matter what, you can take a look at the Hacker News Guidelines[1] and re-evaluate your presence here.
"Value" can only be properly understood as "Benefit - Cost". If the cost is greater than the benefit, the value is negative.
> Everyone likes better software, right?
But does everyone have the same definition of "better"?