I also have had to revert to the original app as iNat Next simply does not work fast enough for my needs. There isn’t time to wait around for actual minutes just trying to get the interface open to add a handful of observations. The absurd response I and others have received from staff thus far is “you should be making fewer observations as the new app isn’t built for volume”. Yes, great idea to tell people to stop using iNaturalist so much. It really makes me feel warm and fuzzy and definitely won’t cause me to warn people in real life not to bother with the new platform.
This is all I want, really (and is essentially what the original iNaturalist app is – in fact, I would be fine if the Projects browser and the News tab were cut out of that app as well). I find it hard to believe that the tradeoff suggested here is worthwhile. That is, that attempting (with apparently limited success) to harmonise all mobile functions into a single app, but having that app be a hundred times slower and with a dumbed-down default interface that discourages adding multiple photos or not AI-identifying and uploading records instantly, makes sense; or that there even needs to be a tradeoff in speed and reliability for the app to be the same experience across platforms. How is it possible that having a cross-platform app means it has to lag to the point where staff are advising “not uploading so much” as the official solution to the ongoing speed issues? I really like to think staff are trying to work through this, and my default assumption is that everyone is operating in good faith. However, the response received so far to each report of problems with the new app has been uniformly a disappointment.
The eagerness to throw resources and time behind implementing (and adjusting on the fly) harebrained schemes like the provisional name pilot (where the enormity of the likely resulting taxonomic problems, and the accessibility of the formatting outside the US, was not thought through) or the now-redirected Google AI effort (to which no backlash was expected, somehow) is beyond exasperating, but totally understandable in a mercenary sort of way given the sums of money being thrown at them. On the other hand, the lack of a similar level of attention or interest regarding core functions and performance of the platform – setting aside, for this thread, the woefully insufficient desktop notification system and other “features” – really makes the app seem more like an afterthought than the alleged flagship for how people should engage with iNaturalist in the first place.
Perhaps it’s like the recent homepage update, and geared toward being maximally shiny to attract new users, but subsequently retaining those users and keeping them satisfied with app performance is not a priority. Or perhaps it’s that the thought is that the new app is sufficient without checking, unless staff have tested alternative configurations and just not mentioned it or explained how it’s been fixed (power-user uploading of hundreds of observations; using a phone that’s not the latest and most powerful model; slower internet connections; trying to make observations at a rapid clip while on a long hike, instead of just leisurely recording with no time constraints). I will admit one failing on my end: I forgot to follow up in an earlier thread and specify that recent updates to the app have not fixed the overall speed of the workflow for me.
Is the request to “upload fewer observations” made out of desperation, or is that genuinely what staff think people should do? I’m not sure which is more off-putting. (I won’t mention any episode of users being singled out by staff for cross-examination questioning based on the specific observations they’ve posted, as at least that seems to have been deleted.)
Pardon the long post. This is something I feel very strongly about. No, I don’t want to stop uploading my usual and reasonable numbers of observations. No, I can’t constantly upload as I go, when I’m in areas or countries without cell service, or trying to avoid draining my entire battery. No, I can’t afford to buy a new fancier phone just for the sake of using iNaturalist. No, the rest of my mobile operating system isn’t lagging or breaking the way iNat Next does. And no, I don’t know if I will continue using iNat on mobile when, as planned, staff someday cut off support for uploading via “iNat Classic”.
: