On 01/14/2013 11:47 AM, Rich Pieri wrote:
On Mon, 14 Jan 2013 09:41:26 -0500
Matthew Gillen <m...@mattgillen.net> wrote:
I don't think that's quite right. It's not that people don't want
choices, it's that they don't want to make choices where they don't
understand the options, and there is a high learning curve (esp. when
options interact with each other in non-trivial ways).
The problem with generalities is that they are always wrong to some degree.
It's not that Joe doesn't understand the options. It's that Joe sees no
point to them.
That depends on the particular "joe" you are talking about. For some
quantity of joe, you will have a range from "don't know, don't care" to
"knows, and cares." If you go too simple, then only the "don't know,
don't care" joe will be happy. If you add too many options without
making something "easy by default" you alienate DKDC joe, but make KC
joe happy.
When Joe goes to the gas pump he sees three numbers that don't mean
anything beyond "expensive shit", "cheap swill", and "the stuff in
between". Joe pushes the button he can afford and fills the tank.
Now, that isn't true. *at all*. Many high end car drivers have to buy
premium because their cars knock. Performance cars typically need the
extra octane. Many "joes" drive cars like mustangs and such.
Joe sees the music ripper the same way: push the button that makes his
music fit on his shiny thing and fill the tank. Offering him an array
of codecs and quality settings and what-not is unnecessary. They just
get in the way and make the computer hard to use when it should be as
easy as pumping gas.
Again, what about the joes that put in really really great audio systems
in their cars?
_______________________________________________
Discuss mailing list
Discuss@blu.org
http://lists.blu.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
