Slashdot Mirror
US's Slow Embrace of Information Technology
mattnyc99 writes "To motivate his new column, Popular Mechanics' Glenn Derene takes research data from a discussion here of his last column. He analyzes a new study released this week — revealing that fully 49 percent of Americans 'only occasionally use modern gadgetry' — to compare the rise of the PC with that of the TV and ask a big question: What keeps the most important and powerful communication tool since the telephone from being universally embraced?"
Are we really comparing the rate of TV adoption to computer adoption? When is the last time you had to do more than press the ON button to operate your television? There's no learning curve, and no risk. People are afraid of computers, and as usual are unwilling to overcome even the most modest of barriers to learn a new skill.
Making you think you're crazy is a billion dollar industry.
It takes ages and it's a PITA.
Do not try to read the dupe, thats impossible. Instead, only try to realize the truth
What truth?
There is no dupe
Who are 10 years behind the rest of the world in bandwidth and services and cost. Blame the cable monopolies who are only a little less horrible than record companies in the rape and pillage the consumers department. Blame Microsoft who, let's face facts, sees you as a wallet. They don't really care how well their crap works and their prices go up not down in contradiction to everything we've ever been promised about the 'digital age.'
I would have thought the neo-Libertarians here would be cheering for state controlled corporatism. Isn't that what you've been working for?
Television is easy. You turn it on, maybe select a channel, and you can sit there for hours. You can change the channel if you really care about what you're watching, but it's also ok to select one channel and leave it on forever. Television doesn't care if you walk away or lay down. It will dutifully drone on in case you happen to be there. Broadcasters are even nice enough to increase the volume on the commercials to make sure that you get exposed to advertising, even if you're in the kitchen cooking dinner.
It's much harder to use a computer the same way. It's a much more interactive experience. Not only do you have to have some basic knowledge of how they work, you have to click on stuff or something. Take poor people in third world countries as an example - how long would it take to teach them to use a computer well enough to keep themselves entertained? Compare that with the level of training needed to use a television.
In both cases, the vast majority of users utilize the technology for entertainment. There are a lot of educational uses available for both technologies, but most users have no interest in that. Mindless entertainment is TV. Interactive entertainment is games/web browsing.
Not everyone wants interactive entertainment. There are a lot of people who get up, go to work, perform some dull, repetetive task, come home and want to continue their zombie lifestyle with a few beers and some background noise/visual stimulation. There's no way for interactive media like computers to compete with television in the zombie market segment.
Comparing the PC with the TV is not really valid.
The TV is a single use, passive, entertainment medium whereas the PC is a multi use, active, tool. In other terms the TV is 'lean back' technology whereas the PC is 'lean forward' technology. Whichever way you put it they are not the same.
init 11 - for when you need that edge.
What keeps the most important and powerful communication tool since the telephone from being universally embraced?
Simple. Human stupidity and laziness, especially the reluctance to take the time to learn key concepts such as computer security and e-mail attachment limits.
I don't blame the ones who are truly unable to adapt and learn to work with the new technology, but the ones who are clearly capable, but ignorant enough to not care, are the ones who contribute to a nation-wide, condescending attitude towards the technologically-trained. Some could say that technology has pampered the public enough to the point that they expect computers to do everything for them and denounce it if they cannot open a bootleg copy of Spiderman 3 because of a lack of video codecs.
A computer is just a tool like a chain saw or a sewing machine. If I need the tool I will get it and use it. If I don't need it, and for day to day living it is really not required, I will not get it. Unless I am a normal guy then I will buy one a put it on the shelf next to the combo-wrench-screwdriver-hammer I bought last week.
Undetectable Steganography? Yep, there's an app fo
Everyone else pointed to the relative complexity, but I think it's more than that.
There are not many televisions in the workplace-- it's a toy for your leisure.
There are often more computers than desired at the workplace-- it's a tool of commerce. Many people just don't want that sort of thing to be prominent in their home lives too.
[
IT gadgets are ultimately not that important in the overall pursuit of happiness. What's the point of keeping up with all of the IT gadgets if all it ever does is give you a constant chore of learning the next new (questionably useless) thing? The general public is not interested in being under a constant challenge to keep up with gadgets that have little affect on their personal lives. Most people don't need a PDA, or a GPS, or a video iPod. The happiest people I know have limited to no access to IT gadgets outside of cell phones. The most stressed and unhappy (add broke and unhealthy) people I know are the ones that are constantly trying to keep up with the latest in technology. A TV is easy...if you're not making a living in IT you just don't need all of the gadgets.
...and you get just a tiny bit closer in relative complexity. But really, whoever publishes something that thinks comparing a TV to a computer has any validity whatsoever, should really just stick to watching the TV.
All pass beyond reach of medicine. None pass beyond the reach of love.
Yep, basically one word: Windows. Microsoft fanboys take a chair, please. Microsoft has single-handedly changed the image of computers from a 1950s/60's/70's "modern marvel" into a troublesome piece of shit. I love my computer(s), and I know many who do, the funny thing is that there's a strong correlation between Windows use and perception that computers "suck". Put simply, because of Microsoft people do not trust their computers. People need to feel secure to adopt new things, and Microsoft has never provided this.
I've been writing software since 1970 and still paid very well for it - vertical applications in video game graphics. I have a MIT degree and had a email address since 1974 and computer newsgroups sicne 1984. I have not bought my own computer yet, bought my first TV and car age 35. Didnt buy a cell phone until last year when when payphones went nearly extinct, and only use it for travel. I sweat from confusion of choices when going into a circuit city.
What keeps the most important and powerful communication tool since the telephone from being universally embraced?
Answer: an aging population.
You don't think this is a problem on the 'net? There are thousands of little groups that hang out with each other, online, because they re-enforce each other's beliefs. Look at profiles on MySpace or other sites and see how many people are looking for a "safe" place to talk about things. I see that as code for "think like I do".
All that the Internet has enabled is that people can now hang out with other people just like them - Regardless of Geography.
The Tao that can be spoken is not the one eternal Tao
Or to say it more concisely: Microsoft
Gates and co have worked their darndest to make bad engineering acceptable. Because their shoddy workmanship is so visible, this effect has spilled over into areas outside of MS specific domain.
Like it or not, MS has bludgeoned the masses into perceiving MS == computers. Like it or not, MS is known for shoddy products. Combine the two and you get computer viruses and not MS Windows ® viruses, e-mail viruses and not MS Outlook ® viruses, database worms and not MS SQL Server ® worms, security holes and not MS Internet Explorer security holes, and so on. Then there are all the intentional screw ups with forced technological obsolescence through undocumented, ever-changing data formats, digital restrictions, compatibility problems stemming from the Embrace-Extend-Extinguish strategy, and lastly fatigue from constant media bombardment as part of the Saturate-Diffuse-Confuse strategy.
Shoot. Even spam is now caused by Microsoft nowadays. Now that open relays are only a memory from decades past, spam is the result of compromised MS machines. It's to the point where these bot nets are bought, traded and fought over. Get rid of MS, you get rid of spam. However, going back to MS == computers, most people wrongly perceive that spam is an inherent part of computing.
from there ...
The Microsoft Effect is sort of a variation of sour grapes. People got burned and don't want to admit they got ripped off or bought a lemon. Rather than check out quality options, it's simply easier and more comfortable to throw good money after bad and convince themselves that all other products suck as badly.
Thus you get the public perception that all electronic devices are crap. The problem is compounded by manufacturers cutting back on quality and service.
Beta is broken and the link to classic doesn't work. Stop wasting our time or there won't be anybody left here.
And the answer to this problem is ... Linux!
Trust me. It's not. Linux makes Windows look like a TV. A dysfunctional, expensive, TV that should be replaced every 6 to 12 months. Linux is that 3 CRT front projection TV you picked up by the side of the road during the town's spring clean up because it "just might work" and a couple of trips to the junk yard might just net you the four or five tubes you need to fire that baby up. Oh, sure, with a CS degree and a few hundred free hours to kill you might end up with a system that is pretty darned snazzy, but nobody else - like your mother, or the babysitter - can figure out how to work it, and when it breaks you'll be either scavenging junkyards for a part the might fit, or you'll have to make your own transistor in your basement.
I've played with linux, and it's a lot of fun. But even as a moderately competent computer user (learned assembly and machine code on a 6502 in the early 80s), I don't find linux TV-friendly, and I've tried some of the better load-and-go distros (ubuntu, which my 4 year old uses, and a couple flavors of knoppix).
Is it just my observation, or are there way too many stupid people in the world?