Slashdot Mirror
The Impact of Technophobes
fsharp writes "Most of us have experience with average folks requesting technical support. I have friends and family members that would be lost without my support. I opt for a sliding scale payment plan, usually dinner. At any rate, The New York Times has a nice piece on the impact of technophobes on the Internet (vis-a-vis MyDoom and other email-borne viruses) and their technologically adept friends and family."
Of course, you're better off simply throwing them at something other than the Internet...
Obliteracy: Words with explosions
That is what the computer industry is about, makeing computers accessable to the end users. If we do not help them, then we are self defetting.
It is our jobs to make it easy to use. Be it as a programmer, a sysadm, or a help desk person. The end goal is to get the end user to use the product.
Actually, its the ones who think that they know what's wrong who are the most difficult to help. They tell you all the information that led them to their conclusion, ignoring the one fact right in front of their nose which would contradict it...
- "History shows again and again how nature points out the folly of men" -- Blue Oyster Cult, 'Godzilla'
I've found Mac zealot's better-than-thou attitude self-selects against having friends, which solves the problem on its own.
that particular sentence is particularly annoying. if you go to china, YOU learn chinese or hire a translator. otherwise you don't go to china.
if she want to use a computer, she will have to learn how to deal with them. i work for an isp, when i receive a virus infected email, i cut off their internet access plain and simple. they can call back to have it reactivated after they get someone competent to disinfect it.
the burnout for those on the other end of the phone when you call tech support is like 8 or 9 months... talk about a hard demanding job.
Evolution or ID?
Your solution is to only support the minority because minority operating systems don't get viruses? Let's pretend Macintosh became 90% of the desktop market and Windows became 10%, just like that. Now all the people who write viruses have switched platforms. Now Macs DO have the virus/worm issues that Windows currently has in the real world, which is the first and I'm assuming the primary reason you stated for not supporting Windows users when it comes to tech support. I wonder how much your opinion of the respective operating systems would change in this hypothetical situation.
You're right, I wouldn't steal a car. But if it were possible, I sure as hell would download one!
Can we really blame the users though?
Yes. Yes, we can.
I often use the analogy of the car when describing tech tasks: no one expects to buy a car and have it run forever (and remain safe) without maintenance. Most people understand the need to check tires (treadwear, air pressure), get the oil changed, etc. Draw parallels to these items for technically-challenged folks and they seem to understand. YMMV.
No one should purchase potentially problematic machines (computers, blenders, cars, etc.) without understanding in a general sense how these things work. I would like to think that would be common sense, but common sense is often neither common nor sense. Discuss.
I want to drag this out as long as possible. Bring me my protractor.
Parents prefer their beloved children. After all they spent years changing our diapers, cooking meals for us, helping with homework, getting us out of scrapes at school, supporting us through college: it's payback time.
I'm less patient with my compemporaries, I make them pay.
...the average computer user isn't going to start becoming computer-savy anytime soon. Even this generation of children are woefully ignorant for the most part. Look at the VCR -- it's been out for ages, and I know that most people still cannot figure out how to program it to record at a certain time or program the clock.
At some point in time, software developers are going to have to come to grips with the fact that their target market isn't going to smarten up, and start building dumber and dumber applications.
The solution to email-bourne viruses isn't to tell people "don't click on attachments." If we want to prevent this, we need to change email programs so that attachments can't do what they are capable of currently. It isn't going to work any other way.
"The market alone cannot provide sufficient constraints on corporation's penchant to cause harm." -- Joel Bakan
Technoclowns need nothing more than a "glorified appliance" and they should be able to treat them as such. My mother should never have a need to "recompile a kernal" or anything like that. All she needs to do is "Turn the picture thing on" and maybe click the email icon.
If there is email in her box it should be:
1)her email
2)the system should be smart (or dumb) enough not to provide her with something that is going to infect itself.
Expand these 2 rules to any other application that her appliance should do.
Example - Looking up movie times. Application should:
1)Show movie times
2)the system should be smart (or dumb) enough not to provide her with something that is going to infect itself.
The problem is forcing mega machines on people that only need an information appliance (or maybe allowing those people to buy them)
Post: Sigged, for your pleasure.
No, computers are moody and unpredictable. That's why many of us have jobs.
One of my computers at home has Windows XP Pro. It works beautifully on some nights and awful on others. Sometimes it boots to BSOD. Other times it runs like a Cray.
I can understand why she thinks that. It's not user education. It's the fact that computers don't always run well. I'm glad they don't - I make tons of money off the fact that I know how to fix most of their problems and they don't.
Interestingly, this entire discussion stems from the limitations of semi-literate (read: average computer users) that many of us forget about when we discuss the latest trends and technologies. My concern is that the gap between the computer literate and the semi-literate could possibly be greater now than it was in the mid 1980s, when computers were quirky and used mostly by hobbyists and very specific business-related activities, and few people owned them for home use in the public at large.
The frustration seems to stem from not just the myriad of viruses, but also the necessity of weekly anti-virus updates, spyware, and the absolutely requirement for some type of firwall on Windows-based computers. I dare say that the level of technical knowledge to maintain a computer today is higher than it was twenty years ago. People seem to gloss over ideas like this but having been involved with computers for more than twenty years, I think it's important to reflect on this once and a while. Regards, Goalive - who was given 'bad karma' on Slashdot because not everyone shares his sense of humor :-/
Personally, I've found this "I'm ignorant and proud of it!" attitude to be a fairly common reaction to being unable to get one's head around something new. Of course, it's a lot more pathetic when it's a 24 year old (what 24 year old can't use a computer, fer chrissake?!?)
At one point, I sort of assumed that anybody could sit down and figure out a computer if they got past the intimidation factor and just took time to understand the basic paradigm by which things happen. I don't think that anymore -- instead, I've glommed onto the more cynical viewpoint that many people reach a certain age beyond which they're just basically incapable of picking up new things.
IMO, it's not *just* an age thing (look at Ms. Tauber). If you stall out learning new things for a couple of years, you lose the knack. That's why my 84 year-old grandfather can use the 'net for email, news and horse races (the guy knows more about streaming video than I do) but my various aunts and uncles can't get their heads around finding the Caps Lock key.
Anyhow, this started worrying me when I got out of college. That's why I feel it's important to read nonfiction or learn new skills (cooking, carpentry, Tae Kwon Do, whatever) and aggressively seek out new things to know.
Use it or lose it.
Every year during my review, I just pray the words "slashdot.org" aren't mentioned.
The virus spreads when Internet users ignore a basic rule of Internet life: never click on an unknown e-mail attachment. Once someone does, MyDoom begins to send itself to the
names in that person's e-mail address book.
Ah, a "basic rule of the Internet"... never open unknown email attachments. So why do we rely on the user to understand this rule? Why don't the common beginning-level email programs (read: Outlook) make it very difficult (impossible?) for beginners to open potentially-dangerous attachments from email addresses that aren't in the address book? Seems like there is too much blaming the victim going on here, and not enough protecting them.
I don't care if it's 90,000 hectares. That lake was not my doing.
Look here's the deal. I'm willing to do work for you, many hours of work in some cases. I'll fix what geeksquad, compusa, or whatever other halfass outfit has fucked up for free. But I expect you to sit down with me and learn how to prevent what got hosed. I don't mind teaching, I've mentored a lot of techs over the years, but I do mind if people dont implement what I teach them.
It's a little like having someone's engine freeze because they ran out of oil. You explain to them that they need to get an oil change, you tell them the enormous number of hours involved, and you repair their engine for them. They thank you and you forget about it, until a year later their now rebuilt engine once more seizes because it ran out of oil. There are only so many times you will fix it before telling them to take care of it on their own.
The issue is not the doing, the issue is the redoing when someone now knows better. I think the solution may be a really basic newbie web page somewhere that teaches people very basic lessons. It has to be made so as not to be patronizing, or people will dismiss it and ignore.
If it covered just these 5 things the Internet would be a much better place.
Dont open attachments from anybody that hasn't verbally told you they one.
Get a popup blocker and do not accept any "offer" that you didn't go looking for.
Antivirus software, use it, update it, and run it at least once a week - all of which can be automated.
Get Ad-Aware and use it. Treat it just like you do your antivirus.
Patch your computer! Go to the appropriate OS update site and use it.
People need to take some responsibility for their own computers. As tempting as the idea for a license is, it would become to easy to politicize. Perhaps we should start holding inviduals financially responsible when their system gets hijacked and inflicts damage on other systems?
Oh lord God, yes! Friends, relatives, even friends of friends... A couple years ago I simply informed everyone I would now simply refuse to help out with any computer-related problems, at least from clueless people. I realised that most of those easy problems could be solved by reading a book and simply gaining some understanding of the machines and that by fixing their computers for them I was just perpetuating the problem. So I threw some darwinism at them, either they adapt or they give up.
Most of us have experience with average folks requesting technical support. I have friends and family members that would be lost without my support
A computer should more aptly be treated like a motor vehicle; yeah, you can go have some fun in it but you'd better drive defensively and know how to operate the thing properly. You don't just take it out of the box and start pressing buttons.
Right! This is exactly the analogy I had in mind. The difference is there's very little people can do to be malicious to a car in the same way as a virus wreaks havoc on your PC, short of letting the air out of the tires or other foolish stunts. Perhaps a better comparison would be if someone went around randomly dumping sugar in the gas tank of anyone whose car didn't have a security system installed.
From the article...
"Go out, get a book," suggests Zack Rubenstein, 28, who has for years provided free technical support for his extended social network. "You went to college and you got a degree, you obviously can learn something. Play around with it; it's not going to kill you."
Hmm...I wonder if he tinkers with his car? Me, I know the basics of how a car engine works, and sure, I understand electronics and wiring and so forth. But I have no clue what goes on in today's modern multi-processor-controlled engine -- it might as well be a black box to me. Actually, it is -- my car is a tool, a device to get me from point A to point B in reasonable comfort.
But I happen to know that there are certain rules of the road to be obeyed, and, if those are not obeyed, then the consequences could be rather painful and/or expensive. What are those rules? Why, I had a nice little booklet that laid the fundamentals out. Had to prove I understood it, too, by taking a test. Oh, and I also had to be passed by an examiner who observed me driving for half an hour before I was allowed on the roads by myself.
And I also know that, on a regular basis, that car needs certain maintenance -- oil changes, fan belt replacements, that sort of thing. If I can't or don't want to do it myself, I have to take it to someone and pay them to do it. Fine by me -- I can earn more by working for half an hour than it costs me to pay someone to have the oil changed, and I'd just as soon not get my hands dirty.
Make sense? After all, isn't a modern PC, with all the complexities of a modern OS and a modern suite of applications, just as internally nebulous to the casual user as is a car? The difference is we pay heaps for cars and are told repeatedly we have to take care of them on a regular basis or that money will be wasted. Oh, and we're carefully checked for basic skills and knowledge before being turned loose in a car.
Computers, though -- they're sold at a (relatively) cheap price and the vendors never advertise that, hey, guess what, you actually need to take care of the thing. (And geeks like Zack Rubenstein perpetuate the myth that anyone can fix a PC with little effort. Come on, a show of hands of all those whose learning-by-experience includes a few good late night sessions of try to fix, break, try to fix again, break even worse, before you finally figure it out. I sure wouldn't risk doing that with a car.)
Most home computers SHOULD be glorified applainces. The average user doesn't need all of the complexity of the current generation of computers and really shouldn't have to deal with it. It is not the fault of the user that they know so little about systems so easily broken. Not everyone has the time, energy or desire to learn about all of the ways in which Windows can self-immolate.
The problem is that computers are designed by geeks for geeks. They need to be designed by skilled industrial designers for complete morons.
And for us gearheads there should be the option to buy complex and tempramental computers/OSes, just like people can still buy cars with manual transmissions.
The age of "you must be a computer nerd" are over and it's time that software designers recognized that fact.
Boobies never hurt anyone. - Sherry Glaser.
Well,
My wife feels that our home computer, or computers in general tend to be much more responsive when I ( programmer for some time ) work with them, then when she ( knows just the basics ) uses it.
At first I though it was just a subjective impression caused my her lack of understanding for the workings of the system. But, when I really though about the different approach we have in working with the computer, I think I found the true cause. Here goes:
I know extremely many details about the machine and software and can overcome small issues, like an option in a program not working properly or a setting in Control Panel, swiftly and without seeing that as an issue. On the other hand, my wife or an non-tech, has no idea about were he may find a solution, or even look for a solution, as long as he was taught how to solve that particular problem.
So, coming back to your post, people that learn haow to operate a computer will always feel mood swings from the system when they encounter "Unexpected errors".
I completely agree. Some of the worst viruses do not really even begin to exploit the OS weaknesses of windows. They are activated by the ignorance of users. Anyone could write an executable piece of code for macs that would function the same way these viruses and worms operate. Same for Linux. Really, these users are literally ASKING their computers to run a piece of code and send copies to everyone in their address book. This has less to do with the OS and more to do with the computer simply doing as it is told.
Those that suggest you "dance like no one is watching" really want to see you make a complete fool of yourself.
I think this article points out one of the major weaknesses in the IT profession currently: a lack of people skills and empathy for the end user.
I've been a computer professional for over 25 years now. I'm still aghast at system administrators who take servers down on the last day of the month for maintenance, with total disregard of the fact that the company's biggest transaction volume occurs that day. Or help desk people who answer the phone in an impatient tone of voice, as if it's a major annoyance that someone is disturbing them.
Computing SHOULD be an appliance, it SHOULD be invisible. Sure, it was cool in the early days of the Internet to be among the priesthood and the elite, but that's not where it's at today. The clueless are not at fault here; it's we geeks who are at fault for designing systems for ourselves, instead of for everyone.
To answer another poster's assertion that the Internet is like a car, you can't just drive, you have to have some knowledge, I'd say this: sure, you have to know how to USE the car. But you shouldn't have to be expected to understand its architecture and occasionally pull the carburetor as well.
My solution for friends and family that ask for technical support is simply that I will help them out if they have a Macintosh. Otherwise, there is no way I have the time to troubleshoot and support Windows, Linux or other Unix operating systems.
In other words, to paraphrase "I am no longer competent to administer or help out with anything more complicated than a toaster, as I haven't worked in the field in years. But rather than admit my own shortcomings, I'm going to blame my atrophied skillset and laziness on you and make you feel guilty for having chosen to run an operating system I am no longer familiar with. Furthermore, I'm going to take that guilt and leverage it into evangelizing the One and Only Computer System(tm) according to My Doctrine(tm): Apple."
Which would be fine, except for the blaming others, guilt trips, and blind evangelism.
I too encourage anyone and everyone who will listen to use something (anything!) other than Microsoft products, and actively encourage people to switch to FreeBSD, Linux, or Apple, but I do not refuse to help friends and family out when they're in a bind, regardless of what they use, and I certainly don't mask my own incompetence in blind evangelism, and make them feel somehow inadequate for my own failings.
The Future of Human Evolution: Autonomy
I'm not sure the term "technophobe" describes such people. I would define a technophobe as someone who is afraid of technology. Most of my friends and family who are technically ignorant, asking for help, aren't really afraid of technology -- they just lack the ability to understand it.
How about "technilliterate" as a substitute term?
Proverbs 21:19
The problem is that computers, as they are now, cannot be used in the way that many people expect to be able to use them (as a result of marketing campaigns). They see all the cool features and want some of that, but have the impression that they can just use it like a toaster when it's really much more complicated.
I think that both ends are going to have to be moved. People will have to learn a few things about How Stuff Works, and computers will continue to get better at taking care of things when they can. But yes, there's some really complicated stuff going on in the background with a lot of variables. It's simply not going to be as easy as people seem to have been lead to believe.
WMBC freeform/independent online radio.
...when you're writing a game...tweak the difficulty of "Easy" to something [your mother] can cope with. -- onion2k
Yes, Some Buzzword complient person that has no real understanding of the underlaying issues it pretty annoying. The kind of person that buys P4's to Make the Internet go faster TM Intel with his 56K dial-up.
However what tend to irritate me more is someone that has no interest in finding out what was wrong. Meaning that even if it is a absolutely simple issue that person will have no qualms asking for help with same problem a week later.
People that complains about pop-ups but refuses to use Mozilla even with IE skin. You know the type.
Help fight continental drift.
You believe Mac's are a better platform? Fine.
Try convincing the rest of the world. You'll find that when you tell the next PC user that you only support Mac is that he won't "get it". That is because you won't take the time to go a little bit onto the PC side of the world, and help him through his problem. If you help him through his problem, he might actually gain your trust and consider your advise on Macs. Empathize with him. Don't put him off, or you'll come off as ignorant, and your words will go right past his ears.
We need more people to help others regardless of situation. Just the first few comments was how to get out of the being-leeched-tech-helper situation. No one becomes any less of a technophobe if they aren't given a chance.
I support all platforms, even when I hate Mac, and have a strong distate for Windows. But I never approach a question to being, "your using the wrong platform." I fix their problem, and swallow my thoughts before they become words. I recommend ways to keep using their computer without losing IE, OE, for example, or their other old work-horses. I don't force them to change. If they seem interested in alternivates, I may suggest mozilla. It may seem backwards to have them keep using IE and windows, but maybe, I'll save them time and frustration moving to another setup. And it will save me time showing them how to use it. I'll fix the problem, right out, and show that I do have skill, and gain their trust, so maybe I can give them real help when times are more desperate.
I frankly believe, we need more honest and capable tech support people. And definately not be a bad tech support like some else said, or put them off. Because what will happen, is people will flock to the few that do give honest help, and overload them, or continue picking up the bad apples out of the bunch. If we don't approach being a good tech support seriously, there will continue to be the so called technophobe impact, regardless of what platform.
But I have no clue what goes on in today's modern multi-processor-controlled engine
God, I see this argument everywhere, and it enrages me to no end. Know what goes on in today's chip controlled engine? The same things that used to go on with ANALOG controls in older engines. Monitoring and control of the mixture of gasoline. Monitoring of heat and vibration. You know, stuff that people used to screw up all the time, stuff that would screw up on its own and the car would need to get tuned up -- carburetor cleaned and tweaked, ignition timing adjusted, etc.
The stuff that the computer controls on your car is unlikely to break. So it doesn't matter that you "don't know what's going on" -- the parts that are causing the problem are still accessible. Car sluggish? Check your gas line, your emissions system, your injectors, you'll find one of them is clogged. If anything, the computer controls HELP you diagnose the problem. For example, they'll tell you if your engine is knocking and they're compensating by adjusting the mix (either more air or more gas). You can still fix the problem...you just know it's not the carburetor's fault. I wish I had assurance that on my '73 Superbug!
I guess what I'm saying is, I don't see where spending a day tweaking your operating system is more valuable than a day spent figuring out how your damn car works, when the car is more expensive to own (and often, to repair).
Hey freaks: now you're ju
I learned my lesson working at the help desk of the dorm computer lab. People go for the path of least resistance. I once had a girl sit down at a machine, immediately turn to me and ask "where's the internet?" becuase I was right next to her and she knew I worked there. She didn't even look at the screen! She didn't even take the time to look for the internet explorer icon and click on it, because it was easier to turn her head and ask me to do it for her. I now hide in the office. There are various signs around the lab which take care of most problems like - Zip drives DO NOT read floppies, please do not put a floppy in the Zip drive. I haven't had to break out the tweezers since I posted a few of those. When I sat out at the desk, people would just yell out questions from across the lab. It's much less convinient to walk to the office, pop your head in, and ask. If they have to go through the effort of walking across the room, they're much more likely to figure things out on their own, or bother the person at the machine next to them. If they do come to office, we know it's something that they probably really do need help with and we try to teach them. We have a policiy of never doing anything for anyone. We make them sit at the computer and we just talk them through what to click on. Even if it is the 100th time I've had to show someone how to click on Attach File to attach a file to their email.
While the New York Times makes its money breeding "divisions" between "phobes" and "philes" in every human endeavor, geeks make money by bringing together people with technology. I am the "designated geek" for many circles of friends and relatives, but I long ago lost patience with giving free help. The worst part is that people think it's worth what they're paying: NOTHING. So they just want someone to take care of it for them, and ignore any actual "advice", usually repeating the problem again.
So I have some consultants in my address book who I refer to those in need. It's like having a plumber to call, except plumbers cost twice as much, and there's that buttcrack to contend with. The pressure is off me, my friends don't feel guilty about calling, they actually take the advice seriously (and avoid paying for repeat calls), and the geeks for hire make money off people with more money than sense. I don't know why it took me so long to start doing it. I guess some kind of ego trip. I definitely look a lot better to my friends by sending them the right help than I did scratching my head and cursing over bad cables on cheap hard drive installs. And the geeks all owe me, when I need something special myself.
--
make install -not war
I've also been the victim of the "you know computers, can you help me" club. I now limit that interaction to close friends and some family (who fortunately are all at least 500 miles away). For everyone else, my answer is this: My time is valuable. If you want me to fix your computer, I charge $70/hr, minimum of 30 minutes. I reached the point where I was getting tired of being taken advantage of.
That being said, I see two larger issues in all this techno illiterate world. The first is obvious to anyone who knows about Windows vs. Linux. Simply put, you can't secure a system that is inherently insecure. Windows users run as "root". Period. Apps that run on it have free reign. App design deficiencies are a real close second though. MyDoom doesn't affect systems that don't use Outlook. Lotus Notes and Eudora spring to mind. My wife was unaffected my MyDoom. Monoculture is not good, kids.
I can't really blame the users fully. They don't know any better and I think it is arrogant of the technoelite (of which I consider myself a member) to expect the rest of the world to bow down to our ideals and expectations of what someone has to know to use a computer.
Which brings me to my second point. The problem isn't the users, it's the computers themselves. Specifically, their interfaces. We've had GUI interfaces for almost 20 years now and frankly, we are still no further ahead in usability. GUI's were supposed to make things easier. All they've done is increase confusion and create new and wonderful ways to breed complexity.
You'd figure after 20 years that we would be coming up with ways of making computers know a little more about how to get things done. I'm not talking Utopian dreams of voice or 3D interfaces, but the building of knowledge into the system. I'm sorry, kids, listening to a CD, ripping some music, sending e-mail or watching a video clip on a computer should not be a chore! People do not care whether a document is .doc, pdf, .txt or .sxw, a video clip is an MPG, RM or an AVI. They get angry when it doesn't work when they just want it to. If the plug-in or player isn't present, give the computer the knowledge to know where to go get it, download it , guide the user through installation and then do the original task. Some programs do better than other at this but it is still often obtuse and fraugth with peril.
We should be listening to these users. Ask them: "How do you think this task should be done?". Have them explain it in terms they know. Get from them the picture in their head of how they think it should be done. It is the hardest thing to do in the world because what they think they want vs. want they really want are often two very different things.
As a result, the following maxim can apply:
The complexity of an application or task is inversely proportional to how simple the user thinks it is. - Matt Pickering
Translated: The easier someone thinks it is to do on a computer, the harder it will be for the developer to write. Conversely, the harder or complicated the user thinks the task is, the easier it usually is to write. I have observed this phenomena over the years and the maxim holds true. The more complicated someone thinks something is to do often I find to be straightforward. Then they come up with things that seem simple to them and they turn out to be devilishly difficult to produce (if not impossible).
Instead of us continuing to create more complex, feature-rich and elaborate applications and environments, we should be embracing these users (people like my parents who are computer clueless) and ask them how we should be
I've been to many a foreign country without knowing the language or having a translator. It's amazing how much can be communicated without language. Of course, a little humility goes a long way in these situations.
I think it's funny people complain so much about technical illiterates. If your friends and family is good people, then what goes around will eventually come around. If you've surrounded yourself with users, than you have a more fundamental problem. As for Ms. Tauber's "moody people" analogy, I think she's right on the money. The logic gates in the CPU might be "purely logical," barring the occasional flipped bit or Pentium bug, but the modern day computer experience is comprised of layers upon layers of code, with arbitrary constructs, metaphors, and bugs strewn throughout. What we see on the computer screen (the conscious mind) is but the tip of the iceberg, supported by a vast, subconscious motley of processes, protocols, libraries, etc., all interacting in strange and often suboptimal ways. I'm a bush league computer guru, pathetic by Slashdot standards but accredited god-like status by my coworkers, and there are many times when I have no idea what the problem is. We've all that experience with that intermittent problem that won't go away and can't be diagnosed.
Don't be so high and mighty: I have the same phobias over fixing my car. I'm sure plenty of people here fix their own cars, but I don't, and I'm sure plenty don't: and we feel exactly the same about our cars that technophobes feel about their computers.
People tend to react emotionally to things they don't understand. If you understand why foo is happening, you'll feel equanimous about it. If you don't, you'll fret.
No, because then it's no longer a computer, it's a glorified appliance.
Then maybe they shouldn't use a computer.
Considering that no one has ever been "taught" but humans inherently have to put effort into learning, then, yes, it is their fault.
In which case, they shouldn't use it (I don't for that very reason).
No, "skilled industrial designers" need to design appliances and other tools with relatively few functions for complete morons. The rest of us are perfectly happy with our computers that have infinite uses and possibilities.
Hmm, and yet to drive a car with an automatic transmission, you must still have a drivers license and training. Maybe we should have a license required to use a computer before you can get on the net, just like you have to have a license to use a car on publicly funded roads.
No, it's obviously NOT over because there is still a need for computer nerds, and there are still computer nerds. Software designers need realize nothing other than what their users requirements are: ie, if the are developing a general purpose operating system, it should be able to do what a general purpose operating system can do; if they are designing an MP3 player, it should play MP3s, no more, no less.
Nathan's blog
I think the main difference is people never (or at least I'd think never) ask their doctor friend for free on-going treatment, or their lawyer friend to defend them in court for free, but lots of people expect that level of help from their computer friends.
Don't get me wrong, I sympathize with the doctors and lawyers, but if I got the same types of questions about computers they get about ilnesses and legal advice I'd be much less prone to complaining about it.
I really don't mind answering which motherboard should I buy? or which computer store o you deal with? or what's the difference between Linux and Windows/MacOS? These questions, even the last one, which they rarely expect a long answer to, take very little time and usually spark more interesting converation.
What I don't like is "something's wrong with my computer, it won't talk to my roommate's computer can you fix it for me?". If I say no I llok like a jerk but if I say yes I could be at it for a few seconds or a few days depending on what the problem really is. (99.9% of people I know do not keep backups and have not upgraded or re-installed since the introduction of Windows 95, but they do blindly trust every program they find for free or close to it.
...Since I know a lot of people who DO neglect their cars. A LOT of people think that it's time to change the oil when the oil light comes on and would not give it any thought before then. Those same people only pay attention to tires when they go flat or it's time to out the Winter set on, and will drive both their sets of tires until they're bald. You can forget about them thinking about ATF, flushing the cooling system once in awhile or changing brake pads before they wear out and grind rivet grooves into the rotors.
Car makers have done a WAY better job in usability and reliability than PC/software makers. Even east-European and South Korean cars made today are better than almost all PCs on the market today. I've heard the argument that people ought to have computer operators licenses--after all, we all learn the rules of the road and obey them to avoid fatal accidents...well, MOST of the time...But ponder what it would be like if Microsoft and Intel made cars and see how many people would die on the highways:
1. You'd have to take your car in for monthly service to remove tar-like deposits from your engine and have the ignition control system 'defragmented'.
2. The location of the gas, brake and clutch would change with each new model year, and each model would be different as well. Also, the steering wheel would be a different size or shape and the gears on the gearshift would chage orders.
3. The leading carmaker would make their new cars use a different fuel, and using the wrong fuel in the wrong car would make the engine catch fire. The new fuel is meant to "increase performance and relibility" of their new models but conveniently destroys competitors models and their own older models.
4. You will be forced to buy a brand new car after 5 years because they stop making parts for it, and use legal tactics to keep anyone else from using their precious obsolete IP to make replicas.
5. Cars spontaneously crash much less than they did a few years ago, but they still often stall on the side of the road for no apparent reason, you cant turn on the headlights while using cruise control and it's common knowledge that when the turn signals stop working, you must fully shut of the car and all occupants must exit and shut the doors behind them, wait 30 seconds then get back in and re-start the car. These problems have existed for 20 years but are of such low priority that they linger on.
6. Every car is required by the manufacturer to be equipped with OnStar-style tracking system "for safety reasons". It's handy when your call stalls so frequently and it costs nothing extra. However, the OnStar system is polluted with marketers broadcasting spam to all the cars, which make your radio tune to stations you don't like and interfere with vital engine systems, reducing your top speed to 50 km/h and increasing gas consumption 400%. Time to "get the engine defragged" again...
Hmm...I wonder if he tinkers with his car? Me, I know the basics of how a car engine works, and sure, I understand electronics and wiring and so forth. But I have no clue what goes on in today's modern multi-processor-controlled engine -- it might as well be a black box to me. Actually, it is -- my car is a tool, a device to get me from point A to point B in reasonable comfort. Normal operating in a car means when you are reversing and going 10kph, you don't shift it directly into drive. (This assumes automatic transmission) On older cars, the transmission could drop out of the car or something. Now opening it up is something different. When my car starts making weird sounds (as Fords all too often do) I take it in. If it's dirty on the inside, I clean it with a paper towel and some armor all. There are a number of things we can expect normal users to do. Some of the things a lot of them do but isn't necessary is scandisk and defrag. They defrag once a week sometimes. They think they are doing the right thing. Basically we should all expect a certain level of comptence. Re-installing windows? Not for your average user. Knowing how to get to the control panel? Now that's something I would love to stop saying...Go to start...yes you have to click on it...then click setting...then click on control panel... It's enough to drive you winsane.
Along the same lines; Would a doctor perform an operation without first performing a thorough examination and asking enough questions to get the full picture? Your Mom likely thought that she was giving you enough info by saying: "My printer won't print." Don't ask, don't tell...right?
Not a personal dig, as I've done the exact same thing, I'm just highlighting a point. Most users with problems don't even have the language or knowledge to properly describe said problem.
-Ben
I can't deny your points about popularity, but there are some mitigating factors that need to be mentioned. How long an exploit remains unpatched is a huge factor. Nothing really new makes it out to the script kiddee level until the real discoverers exploit it privately for a few months.
What's disturbing about MS products is that users have been hit harder by minor variant viruses finding a way around previously patched bugs, than by the actually novel exploit, and people who give a damn about security and do cooperate with good practices aren't seeing nearly as much improvement in their chances as they should.
I know that last point is a bit subjective - just how much safer is not being totally clueless going to make you? - Answer: YMMV.
Certainly, if Linux, (or BSD, or OS X) had 18 times its current market share, there would be about 18 times as many people trying to find holes in it. There might even be 18 times as many genuinely original viruses, worms, and trojans written. (I think it would be somewhat better, maybe only 9 times instead of 18, but you could well be right).I don't think there would be 18 times as many minor variants and kit bashed exploits as there are now, following on those, and I don't think those minor variants would spread as effectively or do as much damage (economically speaking at least).
Who is John Cabal?
Average people don't know the difference between a .jpg an .exe. There are two solutions:
1) Assume everyone on Earth has perfect and complete knowledge of everything, including messages like "error pqx7923.8", which is the current model of software development.
2) Give messages that are in ENGLISH and MEAN SOMETHING. Yes, I know this is totally radical and completely new and unheard of in software. That's because I'm a hardware engineer.
For instance, when clicking on an exe, a message could come up that says "Clicking on an unknown executable is the computer equivalent of swapping body fluids with a stranger. Are you SURE you want to do this?"
I think the problem is deeper and more pervasive: We are becoming a nation of incompetents, or rather, people with such narrow, specialized skill sets that we are incapable of solving problems outside our tiny areas of expertise. I once came across a copy of the "Ladies Home Journal" from 1910 or so. I was amazed by the levels of competence the writers assumed to exist in the readers. Apparently it wasn't uncommon for most/many people of this era to know how to repair all sorts of mechanical devices, raise crops, build additions to their homes, tend to the sick, garden, sew, design clothes, etc. I know that in many ways we are better off today than in 1910 (better medical care, longer lifespan, etc) but we have lost something as well. It is crazy that people who are neurosurgeons, attorneys, university professors should feel terrified in the face of a personal computer. What has happened to values such as self-reliance, ingenuity and competence?