Windows easy to use?

Windows easy to use?

Post by David Goldstei » Sun, 31 Dec 1899 09:00:00



  Here in Germany, they have been showing a commercial on television for
product X.  The interesting thing about this commercial is that it shows
disgruntled computer users bashing in their monitors, throwing their
computers out of windows, etc....  The really interesting part of this
commercial is the following line:  67% of all computer users are
dissatisfied with their computers.  Since it is safe to assume that all
of the computer users shown are more than likely using some version of
Windows, how does this jibe with the fact that MS claims to have the
easiest and most satisfying desktop on any PC?  
  Clearly, something is amiss here.  My tendency is to believe the
number mentioned.  At work, part of my responsibilities is on-site
support.  Everyday, I have to go to fix things that people have messed
up, or attempt to figure out why windows decided to trash someone's
data.  On a daily basis, I hear people complain about Windows, or MS
products.  I will be the first to agree that the end-user is sometimes
at fault; however, this is not true in 100% of the cases.  
  The winvocates that continue to spout off ridiculous uptimes--no NT
machine in existance could have an uptime of years, simply due to the
necessity of installing service packs--, ignorance on the part of any
user that has problems with Winxx, the perceived complexity of setting
up a *nix server, the continual crossposting to COMNA with obvious
trolls, etc..., need to get a grip and come to terms with the
situation.  BG was not able to push *nix boxes off the face of the earth
and he never will be able to. Win2K will not be the OS messiah to make
it happen, either.
  I find it very amusing how much *nix legacy is buried in NT.
Confusing a GUI that creates and modifies config files with doing the
modifications by hand does not make it any easier to configure NT.
Believing that the average small business person can install, set up and
maintain an NT box is like believing that my wife can do it--it ain't
gonna happen, fokes!
  While you winvocates continue to pay your MS tax--and the amount will
be increasing--Linux advocates will continue to make in-roads to the
server market with the development of journaling files systems (already
exist, thank you SuSE), refined desktop apps, games and multimedia,
etc....  Of course, we will not have to pay any "tax" to use our
systems.  If we choose to, we can use freeware, shareware, or pay
* prices for software.  We can custom fit out kernels to our
systems, update a config file with a simple text editor in much less
time than a winvocate can using point-n-click, and have real fun with
our computers, because we are not shut out from the internals of our OS.
 Have a nice day!

David Goldstein

 
 
 

Windows easy to use?

Post by Leon Hans » Sun, 31 Dec 1899 09:00:00


On Thu, 10 Feb 2000 11:25:45 +0100, David Goldstein


>We can custom fit out kernels to our
>systems, update a config file with a simple text editor in much less
>time than a winvocate can using point-n-click, and have real fun with
>our computers, because we are not shut out from the internals of our OS.
> Have a nice day!

Spoken like a true geek. ;-)

 
 
 

Windows easy to use?

Post by Bobby D. Bryan » Sun, 31 Dec 1899 09:00:00



>   Here in Germany, they have been showing a commercial on television for
> product X.  The interesting thing about this commercial is that it shows
> disgruntled computer users bashing in their monitors, throwing their
> computers out of windows, etc....  The really interesting part of this
> commercial is the following line:  67% of all computer users are
> dissatisfied with their computers.  Since it is safe to assume that all
> of the computer users shown are more than likely using some version of
> Windows, how does this jibe with the fact that MS claims to have the
> easiest and most satisfying desktop on any PC?

Simple fact: hide the complexity, hide the power.  A PC is notionally the
equivalent of the Turing Machine ("notionally", because it does not have
infinite storage).  Can Joe User deal with this kind of complexity?  No.
So ease-of-use advocates want to wrap it up in a box and provide an
interface that simplifies -- but limits -- access to the power of the
machine.

Wrap it too tight and the device is no more powerful than a television.
Wrap it too loosely, and it's still too complicated.  Make the wrong
choice, and your customers are unhappy.  There's no easy solution.

And of course, the above is orthogonal to the issue of bugs in your
wrapper, which is probably the real thing that causes the frustration the
commercial is referring to.

Bobby Bryant
Austin, Texas

 
 
 

Windows easy to use?

Post by David Goldstei » Sun, 31 Dec 1899 09:00:00



> On Thu, 10 Feb 2000 11:25:45 +0100, David Goldstein

> >We can custom fit out kernels to our
> >systems, update a config file with a simple text editor in much less
> >time than a winvocate can using point-n-click, and have real fun with
> >our computers, because we are not shut out from the internals of our OS.
> > Have a nice day!

> Spoken like a true geek. ;-)

  Thanks! :)
 
 
 

Windows easy to use?

Post by Stephen Vos » Sun, 31 Dec 1899 09:00:00


Quote:> > >We can custom fit out kernels to our
> > >systems, update a config file with a simple text editor in much less
> > >time than a winvocate can using point-n-click, and have real fun with
> > >our computers, because we are not shut out from the internals of our OS.
> > > Have a nice day!

> > Spoken like a true geek. ;-)

>   Thanks! :)

Most people dont want manual transmission or to hand pump their tires!
 
 
 

Windows easy to use?

Post by Sitaram Chamar » Sun, 31 Dec 1899 09:00:00



>Believing that the average small business person can install, set up and
>maintain an NT box is like believing that my wife can do it--it ain't
>gonna happen, fokes!

I often hear this "computers should be as easy to use as
telephones and therefore Windows is the way to go" or similar
argument from windows-ers.

One day my wife was talking on the phone (with my son listening in
using the kitchen phone) when they got a call-waiting tone.  My
wife tried her darnedest to hit the hook-switch (flash) button to
receive the waiting call but it didn't work.

Of course the phone is easy to use.  But not knowing some of the
background of how the "flash" switch does it's magic, she didn't
realise that my son (on the kitchen line) would have to hang up
before it would work!

Just goes to show that even in the instrument most commonly held
up as an "easy to use" benchmark, there are problems if you don't
know enough.

My wife is a defiant techno-hater (she blames me for this!) but
thanks to her I now have this great counter-argument every time I
hear that stupid analogy!

If you want to use technology, be prepared to pay the price.
Learn.

 
 
 

Windows easy to use?

Post by Edward Roste » Sun, 31 Dec 1899 09:00:00



> > > >We can custom fit out kernels to our
> > > >systems, update a config file with a simple text editor in much less
> > > >time than a winvocate can using point-n-click, and have real fun with
> > > >our computers, because we are not shut out from the internals of our OS.
> > > > Have a nice day!

> > > Spoken like a true geek. ;-)

> >   Thanks! :)

> Most people dont want manual transmission or to hand pump their tires!

Manual transmission is better (its standard in England), but besides, who would
rather
have an automatic if the engine needed re-installing if the wing mirror broke?

-Ed

 
 
 

Windows easy to use?

Post by Alex La » Sun, 31 Dec 1899 09:00:00




> > Most people dont want manual transmission or to hand pump their tires!

> I wouldn't own a car with an automatic transmission.  Nor one with
> electric windows.  Some idiot broke into my car a couple weeks ago and
> mangled the ignition lock trying to steal it.  While I was waiting to
> get it repaired I got to use a Jeep Cherokee as a loaner.  It was a
> fairly nice ride, the visibility was great, but that automatic - yecch.

Your analogy is entirely out dated.  An OS is very different than a
car.  Don't you know that most World Championship Formular-1 race
cars, and the ones that win the most races
are equipted with auto-trans, the kind that have all the control on
the steering wheel, you still select the gear yourself, but no need
to use the clutch, or takes your hand off the steering wheel. This
feature is pioneered by Ferrari in the F-1 world for about 10 years
already. Ferrari, Porsche also have this kind of auto-trans on their
production car. as well as Audi and some VW. Try it, it beats full
manuel shift anytime...

Ease of use and real functionality CAN go together if designed
properly.

As for Windoz$... Well, it's a decoration for the PC!

Alex Lam.

> Well, I guess that's a matter of taste.  Some people prefer the
> "look-and-feel" of Windows 98 to a bash command prompt.  They are
> welcome to their preference, which I definitely do not share.



--
- Tired of broken Windoze? Switch to BSD or Linux.
- http://www.freebsd.org/ http://openbsd.org/
- http://li.org/  http://www.linux.org/
- http://opensource.org/ http://eff.org/