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?"

Comments

example in practice

[Matey-O]

10,000 songs,
audiophile quality,
least restrictive DRM,
6 buttons,
iPod.

Of course, on the other hand:

Manufacturers are doing what they're supposed to

[akiaki007]

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.

Re:RTFM?

[Copid]

One thing I've always wanted to see on a cell phone: An LED flashlight. I could care less about a PDA with a color screen, camera, or other expensive non-feature that just drives the cost up and bulk of my phone. It's a phone! It shouldn't require a 300 page manual!

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.

Negifeatures && planned obsolecense

[An dochasac]

I found this earlier today when I tried to repace my mobile phone battery. "Oh they haven't made that battery for years." (on a 2 year old phone.) So I tried to replace it with a new one but all of the new ones have colour screens which means:

• 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!

/me get's out his souldering Iron and makes a new battery pack for my 3 year old phone.

Re:two words

[badasscat]

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.