Slashdot Mirror
Why Users Hate IT Products and Developers
bfwebster writes "The Washington Post has a commentary by one of its regular columnists, Marc Fisher, on why computer users hate what he terms 'our techie masters.' One of his more pungent and, I suspect, on-the-money comments: 'Computer training has become the living hell of the American workplace...each new system is more confounding than the last, and each new product strips away many of the advantages of the previous system.' Not a Luddite screed; more an angry outburst asking why commercial software systems are often so wretched. Worth reading and pondering."
Also, why in the hell are companies "upgrading" constantly? What ever happened to the days of buy something and use it. Hell, that's what I do for my tiny business. Every "upgrade" is expensive and time consuming. I'll just use what I have, thank you.
Perhaps when developing a new system the developers could take some time to study the methodologies that are used in the gaming market. After all Games are highly technical but must be very easy to learn and use to be popular.
If anything they might start thinking more about the end user then they do right now
Example - Sniffer. Great piece of software. Does everything you could want. But it's so confusing with random tabs all over the place, buttons that are similar but do different tasks in different parts of the program, and completely lacking in intuitive interface....
There is a good point there. Users don't always understand what they want, or can't think through the "unintended consequences" of a system change. They see the result, not the process.
But on the other hand, I know that us geeks have a tendency to read our own agenda into what we're asked to provide, and to ride hard on anyone who disagrees with our intepretation of "how it should be". We deliver a wonderful process, and if it has a good result, that's just icing on the cake.
I used to work with a group of professional architects, and I learned a lot from watching them take user input, question it, refine it, and try to turn it into a project. They spent a lot more time learning about the customer's personality, what sorts of things they liked and didn't like... and the ones who were consistently loved by customers were the ones who were the best listeners.
(A nickle to the first person to identify the person I quoted above!)
Was anyone else reminded of that SNL skit with the Obnoxious tech-support guy? I can't remember the name, ah well.
I think a lot of this has to do with the elitist mindset of a lot IT workers. They see themselves as the masters, the ones who ought to be in charge because so much of the work is done through systems they built. But really, they should think of themselves as servants, trying to build the best system they can to support the end-users. After all, in a business setting, the end users are the ones who produce the true value of that business. IT people are just there to make it easier.
I think this attitude is seen here on slashdot a lot, I see posts by people who feel they are entitled to set policy because they can implement policy at the touch of a few buttons. But that's asinine, policy should be made by people paid to set policy. The IT person's job is to implement policy on a technological level.
autopr0n is like, down and stuff.
So 20 years ago I would have had to pay more for an airline ticket than today, to fly to Washington, to by a copy of the WP, to read whatever this bozo has to say. Now I can do it sitting at my desk at the arse-end of the world withing seconds of him hitting the "publish" button. No progress or convenience there that I can see.
-- Free software on every PC on every desk
I worked on large systems for large companies. However I never got to meet anyone that actually used the product. We were on the forth revision of software by the time I left.
I was basically the main coder. I was pretty good at my job, but I would get 100 page technical specs, 70 pages of which would describe how on the front page this dolphin would swim from one side to the other. On a company intranet. sigh.
Several years later I saw the said company at a careers fair. I mentioned that I wrote quite a lot of their intranet, and how it was doing. They said there were still many problems with it - and I wasn't surprised.
The trouble was that I had to go through my boss, who went through the company bosses, who went through the top level managers. The end users weren't consulted at all.
Also everyone wanted to see results _now_, requiring fast development.
Anyway, I've rambled enough.
And they say the techies are the ones lacking communications skills? How about people ask for what they actually want; maybe they'll have a better chance of getting it that way...
The other side of that coin, since I work in QA, is that the developers don't want to listen when you tell them the way they designed it is hard to use and/or doesn't make sense.
I recently tested an FTP type program where the developer put the DELETE button right next to the TRANSFER button. You could actually have the pointer over the TRANSFER button but it was selecting DELETE since the buttons were so close. On top of that, there was no delete confirmation dialog so you could think that you transferred the file when you actually deleted it from your machine. I complained heavily to the design group and got lots of flak for it. I suggested putting the Refresh button between the two but they didn't want to do that because their design was PERFECT in their eyes. Their decision was to just add a delete confimation dialog that was turned off by default and had to be turned on in an obscure preference screen.
I designed a computerized inventory system a few years ago at work. It really worked and all but it also took longer to use than the old pencil, paper and catalog system it replaced. My co-workers at first chaffed at the paper-work and soon outright sabatage.
My boss had assigned me an hour block of time for training on my baby, where I stood up in front of the whole office and said 'You guys hate this all ready don't you? Everybody agreed, I continued, 'It was one of those good ideas that just don't work out in real life, just because you can put a screw in a board with a hammer doesn't mean you should throw ou your screw drivers; we doing it the old way from now on'. Now my ideas are respected more than ever because people now I'm not above giving up on a lost cause.
Apocalypse Cancelled, Sorry, No Ticket Refunds
Actually, the codes were pretty sweet. Much like web pages are today, with begin and end tags around everything. It allowed you to use macros to zoom right in on certain text elements and rip through a document for automatic changes. That is much harder to do in Word. And after all these years, Word still can't give you multiple headers/footers on the same page. They say they can, but all it is a different first page, or different odd or even. Some publishers have multiple headers and footers on the same page, such as titles, then chapters that change, and maybe another line under that changes again.
One of the biggest draw backs for a windows word processors is time at the keyboard. In a high production industry, like insurance, where people get paid to simply enter enormous amounts of data daily, whenever you pick up your hand to put it on the mouse, and have to click something, you have lost time. That's why most of those types of jobs still have dos/terminal based programs so the data just gets posted directly. None of this horsing around with the mouse. And believe it or not, these jobs are often timed with a stopwatch, to make sure performance is at peak.
Oh yeah, and next time you are in need of a lawyer, ask them what type of software they use. You would be surprised at how many are still using WordPerfect 5.1.
I'm an attorney at a law office with about 16 computers. We are still using WordPerfect for Windows 6.1. Why?
Because EVERY new release since then, of both WordPerfect and Word, hasn't given me (I make the IT decisions) a sufficiently good enough reason to ask the staff to learn how to use a new system.
Contrary to those bashing Microsoft, this isn't MS's fault, and it's not a case where people using Macs just don't have this problem. It's really simple - Once you get used to a system, you don't want to change, as long as the system you know does what you want.
We've gone though multiple changes in software - WordPerfect for Windows 6.1 was much easier to use than WordPerfect 5.1, ACT! has improved over time, and we've more or less kept upgrading Windows whenever Bill Gates wanted more money. Except for ME, each windows upgrade was worth it, from a usability and reliability standpoint.
But we still use WP6.1, even though it has 8.3 filenames and an automated template system that's crippled (and was finally finally fixed in WP10). Not only is this program reliable and does what we need it to do, it's faster than any of its successors because it was written for computers running 80386's.
Also, I have to say that the WP6.1 file dialogue boxes, are just plain better than anything I've seen since. Who in the hell thought that a sideways scrolling file-open dialogue box filled with useless icons was a good idea, especially when you can have really long filenames that take up half the screen?
Before I upgrade our software, there's got to be a reason better than "there's a new version out". The new software has to fill a need that isn't filled by the old software, or it has to solve serious reliability problems.
144l. ph34r my 133t l3g4l 5k1lz!
many WIN users i see, only use email, the web and word. they can barely use those because they don't even know how to use a file system, let alone something more fancy.
Ain't it the truth! MS would do us all a world of good if they could include a tutorial on filesystem fundamentals with their systems. I'm sure many of you know how exasperating it is to have so many users who have one directory for everything, then when they accidently put something somewhere else, they totally freak out and think the computer has somehow eaten their data.
When I was a LAN admin several years ago, I used to try to inoculate myself against such things by providing a tutorial (both live and as a website) on what I called The Fully Qualified Filename. I would demonstrate in simple terms exactly what a directory tree was, and how you could make it work for you (re: grouping similar documents together, or grouping my topic). I would also show that everything on the computer was a file, and how to make that work for you as well.
Understanding your filesystem is fundamental to having less troublesome computing.
This is an ex-parrot!
Personally, I am an end-user and not a techie (right, so what am I doing here? don't ask!). Now, granted, I'm a tad more computer-savvy than the average end-user (having a disgustingly genius-like programmer for a husband helps), but even I fail to understand how tech staff can be so arrogant and condescending. Do the techs here think they can handle MY job? No? Then don't try to make me feel stupid for not being able to do THEIR job, which, in essence, is to help me use the technology I need to do my job.
Now I know that it's standard for techs to assume that the user is a moron, because, quite often, the user IS a moron. However, there are those of us who do have a slight clue what we're doing. So we can't understand root code, and we may not know what's wrong the first time our printer starts spewing out toner and blinking furiously, but that doesn't mean we're unintelligent or incapable of understanding.
I've never had training for any piece of software I've ever used, but I think I manage all right. I haven't had too many problems upgrading between different versions (I admit, it baffles me when the developer removes a certain feature for no apparent reason). All in all, even though I do basic checks before calling tech support to save them trouble, they tend to be even MORE annoyed when I seem to have a clue as to what I'm talking about. Seems they don't like knowledgeable users - it ruins their god-like image.
It's arrogant beyond belief to assume that all users are idiots. I know that's probably not what the parent post intended, but it's the end effect that counts. If you realize that your user isn't following quite as quickly as you're explaining, just slow down. Be patient. How would you have liked it if your grade two math teacher had just plowed through long division rather than explain it to you? Would you like it if someone pushed you away from your keyboard saying "Never mind, just let me do it"? The personal skills, with MOST tech support (not all, there are many good people out there), just aren't there. It's the truth. Deal with it.
Visit us at http://www.iblist.com!