Linked by Thom Holwerda on Mon 12th Jul 2004 08:45 UTC
Permalink for comment
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
News
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/25/13 0:45 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/24/13 23:59 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/24/13 22:33 UTC
Linked by Howard Fosdick on 05/24/13 21:41 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/24/13 14:44 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/23/13 23:22 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/23/13 22:04 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/23/13 22:01 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/23/13 17:52 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/22/13 22:23 UTC
More News »
Sponsored Links



'//Let''s imagine that each time you start your car, you had to wait two to three minutes before you could drive off. How would you like that?//
Let's imagine that we try not to compare a device that typically costs US $1,000.00 with one that typically costs US $10,000.00
I'd expect quite a bit of "user experience" difference in my car, vs. my computer.
Ding! Thanks for playing.'
hmmmm... I see, the cheaper the product the harder it should be to use? If I buy a $30 shirt, it should have 7 holes in it, none of which are big enough to fit my head through? If I buy a 50 cent piece of candy, I should have to wait three hours between opening the wrapper and eating it? But if I spent $10k for a piece of candy, then I should be able to eat it immediately. If I bought a $10k computer, then it would boot instantaneosly and be as easy to use as a car?
I'm not saying his comparison of a car and computer necessarily means something, but I don't see how your statement of price has anything to do with anything.
In any event, I think his point was only that we seem to have acclimated ourselves to some low expectations when it comes computer operation (or something like that), and we are willing to accept shortcomings from computers that we would find intolerable in other products. Price has nothing to do with that.