OK, this is getting OT, but you'd buy a car without test driving it? Seriously?
On Tue, Oct 22, 2013 at 5:06 PM, Ed Gould <[email protected]> wrote: > Tony: > Chuckle I don't think that will help as most vehicles on the showroom > floor do not have power (battery has been disconnected). > Having said that I recently bought a car and did not like the stereo the > car came with. I went to a place that sold different models and was not > allowed to play around with the "monitor". > The screen is a touch screen and it can go bonkers just by touching it. > Whenever it goes bonkers I have to pull over to the side of the road and > get out the owners manual (big deal its written in poorly translated > Japanese) I like the quality but hate having to deal with it when its > needed. > > Ed > > > > On Oct 22, 2013, at 12:47 PM, Tony's Ancient Dell wrote: > > A recent experience with a rental car has me re-thinking the concept of >> the test drive. My own cars are 10+ years old, dog years in technology. >> The latest automotive examples makes the term "regular car" a paradigm >> that is slipping away from me. Next time I kick some new car tires I'll >> begin the test "drive" by sitting in the parking lot and spending a fair >> amount of time judging the touch screen interface. If I don't like it >> there's no point in driving off the dealer's lot. >> >> YouTube has some helpful examples of automotive whiz bang technology. >> >> >> >> On 10/22/2013 11:30 AM, John McKown wrote: >> >>> The problem, for the "average end user", is just what Microsoft said long >>> ago: Choice is bad. Today's end users need the equivalent of an >>> automobile. >>> Once you've learned how to drive a "regular" car (versus an 18-wheeler or >>> Formula One or NASCAR ...), then you can fairly easily drive most other >>> consumer cars. Computers are still in the pre-Henry Ford days. Every car >>> manufacturer did it their own way, sometimes multiple ways. Personally, I >>> think that the smart phone or tablet interface will "win out" for the >>> average consumer. Only geeks (and maybe hard core gamers) will use mice >>> and >>> keyboards. I try to imagine the future "knowledge worker" trying to use >>> these interfaces for things like claim forms. I rather like the thought >>> of >>> a Quake-like interface for claims processing <grin/>. "Frag that claim!" >>> But it may be that the real future (assuming the ME doesn't explode and >>> destroy the entire civilization) is phablet sized devices mainly using >>> voice recognition and speech. I do that for SMS messages on my Android >>> smart phone. >>> >>> >>> On Tue, Oct 22, 2013 at 11:16 AM, Lou Losee <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>> Is it truly required for *everyone* to be computer literate? In the >>>> early >>>> days computers were not so widespread the few that used them were those >>>> that understood them and how they worked. This was necessary as the >>>> systems themselves were crude with regard to interfaces and services >>>> provided. Now that the computer has become more of an appliance why >>>> should >>>> users need to understand it anymore than they need to understand how a >>>> phone or a car transmission (manual or automatic) works in order to use >>>> it. >>>> >>>> If you want to spread technology to the masses, you need to remove the >>>> complexity and the need for intimate understanding. Everyone does not >>>> have >>>> the time, knowledge or possibly the intellect for understanding complex >>>> systems that are in common use. >>>> >>>> Lou >>>> >>>> -- >>>> Artificial Intelligence is no match for Natural Stupidity >>>> - Unknown >>>> >>>> >>>> On Tue, Oct 22, 2013 at 9:46 AM, Gerhard Adam <[email protected]> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>> Fair enough, but let's forget about users in this regard. In my >>>>> experience, >>>>> the business environment has become unnecessarily restrictive regarding >>>>> risk, so that even supposed "sandbox" systems may have significant >>>>> limits >>>>> on >>>>> what an individual can do. When this is coupled with there being zero >>>>> benefit to taking on such a risk, it becomes easier to see why >>>>> >>>> individuals >>>> >>>>> shy away from it. >>>>> >>>>> What's the point in trying to learn something when the only time you >>>>> get >>>>> attention is when you make a mistake. >>>>> >>>>> So while it was certainly true that there were PLMs and training more >>>>> readily available in the past, it is equally true that many techies >>>>> >>>> learned >>>> >>>>> because of mistakes and errors, whereas today there is little praise >>>>> and >>>>> much blame for those taking on those tasks. >>>>> >>>>> Adam >>>>> >>>>> Good question. For professional training (which costs $$$$$$), it is >>>>>> >>>>> likely >>>>> >>>>>> the business environment. But I've also had users refuse to take free, >>>>>> internal, courses because they: (1) don't have the time; (2) already >>>>>> >>>>> know >>>> >>>>> all that stuff; and (3) don't want to bother because software should be >>>>>> "intuitive" (i.e. should do what I want/need, not what I tell it to). >>>>>> >>>>> ------------------------------**------------------------------** >>>>> ---------- >>>>> For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, >>>>> send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN >>>>> >>>>> ------------------------------**------------------------------** >>>> ---------- >>>> For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, >>>> send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >> ------------------------------**------------------------------** >> ---------- >> For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, >> send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN >> > > ------------------------------**------------------------------**---------- > For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, > send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN > -- zMan -- "I've got a mainframe and I'm not afraid to use it" ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
