At 7:33 am -0500 1/3/01, Michael W. Wellman wrote:
>> Paul, I fear you've missed my point. Everything you say is true *from within
>> the computer community*, but of little relevance outside.
>
>I know more than a few people who never buy the first generation of a new
>car model. Or of a "new technology" (think VCR, LD, DVD, microwaves,
>wireless telephones, cell phones).
>
>They've made a conscious choice to give up "new" for "reliable".
>
>So I don't think this is a problem limited solely to the computer community.
I agree it's not limited to the computer industry, but I suspect it
is far more prevelant in the Technology industries than the
mainstream commercial.
Imagine buying a Quadrophonic sound system only to find it worked on
3 speakers? Or buying a Ford Car advertised as having Air Con to find
it works from 10 to 15°C but not above? There would be an outcry.
So, when Joe Soap goes into Computer World and browses the Mac
Software shelves (or should that be shelf?) he sees Microsoft
Office:Mac and the box says "Syncs with your hand-held!" without
spelling out some serious limitations. Isn't he entitled to get just
as upset as he would in the previous examples?
Didn't Steve Jobs introduce the iMac & iBook partly to get out of the
'Hi-Tech for Geeks' market for computers and bring them into an
'appliance' market? Isn't that a reasonable step to take? Hardware
wise he has pretty well achieved that (there is no step 3!), but I
think that a lot of companies have a long way to go on the Software
side.
>
>> For the millions of people who are not part of these and other forums, they
>> have a right to expect software to function as well as any other product.
>
>A right? That's a bit extreme. Life, liberty, the pursuit of happiness,
>and bug-free software?
Not necessarily a right to have it bug-free, but consumers (in the UK
at least) DO have the right to have a product perform AS ADVERTISED.
If there are limitations to any advertised feature, they should be
spelled out clearly BEFORE the consumer makes his purchase. It would
be interesting to see a case of damages for faulty software brought
by our Advertising Standards Agency.
>
>> My partner is a good example. She uses computing for its functionality -
>> word-processing, spreadsheets and addressbook - period.
>
>Well then, the Palm syncing problem wouldn't affect her, now would it? ;-)
Yes, she may. If she uses the computer for an address book, why wouldn't she?
--
=Barry Wainwright=
Common Sense is the best distributed commodity in the world, for
every man is convinced that he is well supplied with it. -- René
Descartes, 1637
--
To unsubscribe: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To search the archives:
<http://www.mail-archive.com/entourage-talk%40lists.boingo.com/>
