I also read all the text in a dialog box (because I've learnt from my mistakes). Unfortunately, 'joe normal' doesn't, because they're not total nerds. They trust that the systems are designed in an intuitive and user-friendly way, and when they get caught out by weasel wording or just plain confusing syntax they can't understand why (because everything is always so unfortunately final if you hit OK on computers these days!)
And echoing what was said earlier, the big problem with DRM adoption with the general public is that it'll happen because people don't realise the larger, longer-term implications of committing themselves to any one particular scheme. When they realise what they can and cannot do, it's all too late (or obsolete). The reason there's only a comparatively small percentage of people who are vocal on this subject is because that same percentage is usually also regarded as the geekier, higher-than-average-PC-literate minority. My mum doesn't understand DRM and even if I explained its implications to her she'd probably forget, because it doesn't immediately concern her. However, I like to plan ahead and so I go learn about things, what'll happen if x is adopted or y becomes the common format - and so we learn about these kind of things and are rightly vocal about them when an important decision is being made by (for example) a publicly-funded corporation on behalf of the general public at large. Public Value questionnaires and tests are largely pointless when you're asking a nation of pretty-newbie computer users as to the wider technical implications of one proprietary rights restriction scheme... It's like a pharmacist asking me to explain my reasoning for why I might not appreciate abc ingredient being put into a medicine as opposed to xyz ingredient - I have no in-depth technical understanding of the issue so I just have no idea how I should be answering and what issues I should be raising. The vocal minority are usually the more informed ones in any very technical discussion (be they biased or not against the organisation asking for feedback on implementation of their proposals, but that's another matter entirely). And that's why DRM discussion will just go round in circles until someone comes along which exhibits a demonstrable downside, which is both immediately explainable and fully obvious to the general tech-using population. Something like Sky requiring HDCP-compliant HDTVs for their SkyHD receives, and downgrading the resolution to 576p on eeeeeeeverybody's HD panels until a replacement is purchased - that'd quickly raise the issue of DRM in a way that almost everybody would understand. I can't wait. > -----Original Message----- > From: Richard Lockwood [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: 12 June 2007 19:08 > To: backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk > Subject: Re: [backstage] www.FreeTheBBC.info > > > Firstly, its well known by usability professionals that as > users get > > more experienced with graphical user interfaces, they stop > reading the > > exact text of messages, and infer from their actions and > the text of > > the message box buttons what to click. I'm sorry to hear > that you are > > still spending time carefully reading the full text of > message boxes. > > Tom Morris' Mum appears to have reached this level of competence, > > though. > > Yes. When it comes down to using a new application, or doing > something that might adversely affect data, then yes, I'm > ashamed to say I do read dialogue boxes. It's interesting > that you're now shoring up your argument by positioning > DRM-free data as an antidote to stupidity. > > Cheers, > > Rich. > - > Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To > unsubscribe, please visit > http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. > Unofficial list archive: > http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/ - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/
