Slashdot Mirror
KISS
andyring writes "CNN has an interesting article about the increasing trend in electronics to add more and more features, less concise user manuals, and poor marketing, to products, which end up doing nothing more than increasing costs and frustrating users. As an example in the article, most people want cell phones that do one thing - make calls. Yet phones come with games, instant messaging, cameras, etc. You can't even buy a simple cell phone any more. Also cited, 25% of people think they own an HDTV, when the actual number is less than 10%. What can be done to make manufacturers get their heads into the real world?"
10,000 songs,
audiophile quality,
least restrictive DRM,
6 buttons,
iPod.
Of course, on the other hand:
"Draco dormiens nunquam titillandus."
What can be done to make manufacturers get their heads into the real world?
Um, ok. So, let me get this straight. You want these manufacturers to _not_ take advantage of the people dumb enough to believe they are buying something else. Those 15% of the people that think that they have an HDTV, probably bought something that was overpriced, and might end up buying equipment that would only work to it's fullest with a HDTV system. They're making money off of the stupid. I don't expect them to change. While it would be moral and nice of them to, but since when is capitalism moral and nice? It's about money, and if someone wants to give it to them, they will take it.
"Time is long and life is short, so begin to live while you still can." -EV
A flashlight would be cool, though. It would require minimal extra lighting. The phone battery is more than capable of driving an excellent LED light. I actually *need* a flashlight on a regular basis, and I always have my phone with me. It seems like a perfect match.
An interesting anagram of "BANACH TARSKI" is "BANACH TARSKI BANACH TARSKI"
- Less battery life
- Not easily viewable in sunlight
- Not water resistant (even I don't understand this one!)
Manufacturers seem to have forgotten the purpose of mobile phones.Same issue with laptops. I have an pismo laptop from 4 years ago with as much as 10 hours of battery life. If there exists such a system today, I'll buy it but marketeers find it easier to push Ghz, so we get Ghz. This reminds me of radios from the 1960s when boasting "10 transistors" was so important that some manufacturers soldered in dummy transistors!
I have a professor who mentioned his cell is years old because all the new, small phones can't punch a signal through his house. He likes the big numbers and easy to hit buttons as well. I bet all the people I see at work during lunch time desperately trying to get a call out by standing near the window and finally going outside would appreciate it more than size as well.
That article lost me the minute the guy started talking about how his camera was too technologically advanced because it had options to force the flash or set long exposure times.
These are options that have been available on cameras for approximately 100 years.
I mean, we have gotten to the point where if technology does not simplify our lives to a ridiculous degree, we blame the technology, even if technology is giving us the same exact features we've always had! What was fine before suddenly becomes burdensome simply because it's digital and our expectations are different. Do we expect to have fewer features in digital products than we did in analog, simply because we're too stupid or impatient to read a damn manual? It seems that way.
I'd like to keep my long exposure, manual focus, forced flash and aperture modes, thanks. I am happy camera makers are continuing to provide these as options on some models and are even filtering them down to less expensive consumer cameras. Not every product needs to pander to the lowest common denominator.
So some people can't figure out how to use the things they buy. Too bad. I say add more features. Many features require little in the way of additional hardware. Why not include them even if they're not used often? Granted, sometimes there are bad interfaces but a bad interface is better than NO interface!
It's sad. Look at what happened to digital watches. They're much more reliable than analog watches and they died only because people couldn't figure out how to set them to the correct time.
On a similar note, I'm beginning to hate PowerPoint. Why does everything have to be broken into bite size pieces? Give me high density information. I'm a big boy. I can read a white paper.
Phones seem to have gotten more complex; perhaps there is hope they emerge as the dominant pocket appliance - it seems sure something will emerge as such, at least to me. I don't want to have to worry about carrying more than one device and yes it would be nice if it had a flashlight and also unlocked my car and started it too.
So, whoever said it is right, phones are getting more complex. This is probably ok if you really think about it.
CD players aren't really, and the same goes for VCRs and DVD players. They can all now be had very very cheaply in their most simple form. This is, I think, a good thing. One might argue, they've been around longer as consumer appliances and they've figured KISS out.
But, I'm not seeing a whole lot of KISS in the software world. Especially in the Windows world.
With the exception of most decent and I mean really decent *nix software, most software seems to have gone on a sugar and steroid fad diet for nearly the past few decade.
Ever see MSDOS 2.2 run on a multi gighertz modern machine? Try it. It's scary fast. What happened?
Ten years ago I used to setup internet stuff in people houses for a local ISP. It was a good way to make $100/hr as it really didn't take more than 45 minutes anyway. I carried around Netscape on one flopy, Eudora, Trumpet Winsock, ftp, telnet and talk on the other floppy.
Quark was 3 megs. Then it was 7 megs. Now it's 300. Is it 100x better? Fuck no, it's not even as good.
Fit enough for an internet setup on a floppy? I'm not sure you could get it to fit on one CD these days.
If any of you out there actually write this stuff: WHAT IS WRONG WITH YOU PEOPLE? HAVE YOU NO PRIDE?
"Hello World!" Shouldn't be 7 frikkin megs because you're pulling in God knows what class libraries, this can be 42 byte program if you really try.
I swear Windows apps had to go through 3 or 4 generations of hardware upgrades just to get back to as fast as they were before they all went "true 32 bit" and I cringe at the prospect of 64 and maybe even 128 bit apps.
One of the computers I use is a W98 system on fairly contemporary hardware. I still use 3 or 4 16-bit Windows programs I've been carrying with me for over a decade now. They're small, fast do what I want and nothing more.
And all 3 fit on one floppy with room to spare.
I dunno about thit object oriented class library stuff, I really don't know. I wish more people would learn assembler below the C level than keep wanting to go above it with "easier" and "more powerful" languages; I think it's ill advised.
Short term pain for long term gain: you should probably suffer writing software so I don't have to when using it.
Need Mercedes parts ?