> As an application developer, I need to know that my application is working appropriately for my users.
You don't need telemetry for that. We have several decades of data showing that software can be developed, tested, deployed, used, and valued without ever forcibly collecting a single bit of data from users.
Why on earth should a user trust that their data isn't being used to spy on them just because it's being collecting under the guise of being for something else? Once the data is collected, the user has no control over what a company will do with it and the only sane assumption users can make these days is that if a company can make more money by doing something (like selling or abusing the personal data of their users) they will do that thing.
The practice of collecting telemetry is also highly suspicious because it's often done without the user's consent (opt out at best), and without showing the user exactly what data is collected and sent.
The fact is that companies have betrayed the public's trust so many times, and in such egregious ways, that it's unreasonable for developers to expect people to "just trust them" to do the right thing. If you don't want to be accused to spying, maybe just don't behave like spyware. Do testing, solicit voluntary feedback, and eat your own dog food.
Again, it’s just your preference. No one is forcing you to use such software. It’s not the moral issue you’re framing it as.
We also don’t have “decades of data”. Almost all large scale software systems leverage some form of telemetry/monitoring. Would you run a factory without quality control on the process? A more interesting question to me is which large software systems don’t use telemetry? Linux maybe?
The first computer program was written in the 1840s. FORTRAN was released in the 1950s. I promise that we had many many decades of amazing software that didn't phone home to spy on users. Most software had no telemetry at all until well after the internet became mainstream.
When many people connected to the internet via dial up, phoning home (even just to check for updates) could get your software branded as spyware. The idea that a software company would be collecting data on what dates/times you were online, what your IP address was, and when/how often you used the software you purchased was offensive. Adware (and nagware) were tradeoffs users knowingly made, but data collection was a sin.
As the internet got popular enough more and more programs started spying on users and there were efforts to come up with clear guidelines for what was/wasn't acceptable, for example: https://www.grc.com/oo/cbc.htm
Today most programs collecting telemetry would fail by that standard.
Just because "everybody does it" today that doesn't make it right. Most computer users have no understanding of what the software they run is doing, very little idea of the risks/harms involved with giving up their personal data, and no idea that there was ever a time when things were any different.
It's still not any of your business when your users run their software. Which features they use more often or what tasks they use their software for are also none of your business. You might find that information useful to have, but that doesn't make it yours to take without asking.
You don't need telemetry. If you want it because it lets you be lazier, request permission before collecting anything and make sure users know exactly what is being collected before asking them to opt in. Just having or pointing users to a privacy policy is not enough. Don't collect anything more than you absolutely have to and delete the data quickly once you have it so that it can't be leaked/sold later. Anything less than that is disrespectful and deceptive.
You don't need telemetry for that. We have several decades of data showing that software can be developed, tested, deployed, used, and valued without ever forcibly collecting a single bit of data from users.
Why on earth should a user trust that their data isn't being used to spy on them just because it's being collecting under the guise of being for something else? Once the data is collected, the user has no control over what a company will do with it and the only sane assumption users can make these days is that if a company can make more money by doing something (like selling or abusing the personal data of their users) they will do that thing.
The practice of collecting telemetry is also highly suspicious because it's often done without the user's consent (opt out at best), and without showing the user exactly what data is collected and sent.
The fact is that companies have betrayed the public's trust so many times, and in such egregious ways, that it's unreasonable for developers to expect people to "just trust them" to do the right thing. If you don't want to be accused to spying, maybe just don't behave like spyware. Do testing, solicit voluntary feedback, and eat your own dog food.