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 <llo...@gmail.com> 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
<gada...@charter.net> 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 lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO
IBM-MAIN
--------------------------------------------------------------------
--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-
MAIN
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
