Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
5 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,815 Year: 3,072/9,624 Month: 917/1,588 Week: 100/223 Day: 11/17 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Felger Sounds Off on Internet Insanity
Percy
Member
Posts: 22391
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 5.2


Message 16 of 96 (771264)
10-23-2015 8:29 AM
Reply to: Message 7 by Diomedes
10-22-2015 3:29 PM


Concerning Netflix interfaces, clearly Netflix doesn't have a central team responsible for the interface. It's possible that each manufacturer (Samsung, Tivo, X-Box, etc.) is responsible for implementing their own Netflix interface, using a protocol provided by Netflix for communicating with software on Netflix servers. Within a company like Samsung, different product development teams would be responsible for TVs and BluRay players, and very likely different people would be responsible for the Netflix interfaces.
But the evidence I have from my TiVo argues against this. If TiVo had implemented all its interfaces to Netflix, Hulu, Amazon, Pandora, YouTube, etc., then you would expect they would all have a similar look and feel, or at least that some of them would, but none of them do. They're all different. Some of them are spectacularly stupid, like Amazon's.
Maybe who does each interface and upgrade is the result of a negotiation. Now that I think about it, that makes the most sense to me. Each effort would be done by the company with the greatest competitive need at the time, and that would pretty much guarantee a patchwork of implementations and upgrades.
--Percy

This message is a reply to:
 Message 7 by Diomedes, posted 10-22-2015 3:29 PM Diomedes has not replied

  
Percy
Member
Posts: 22391
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 5.2


(2)
Message 17 of 96 (771266)
10-23-2015 10:12 AM
Reply to: Message 9 by Omnivorous
10-22-2015 4:43 PM


Omnivorous writes:
Remember 2400 baud modem connections to bulletin boards?
I remember connecting to mainframes with 110 baud acoustic couplers. When we got 300 baud modems in 1980 it was wonderful.
It seems they won't put anything better in the grinder as long as we buy the sausage du jour.
We have been complicit in constructing our own hell. The devices (or apps or programs) we use on an everyday basis should have the complexity of, say, a TV from 1990, not a multi-band shortwave radio from the 1950's. And they should have the same reliability.
Watching Buffalo vs. Indianapolis this Sunday morning should be as simple as turning on the TV and tuning it to the correct station. That it's not is not our fault. That we watch it anyway (and endure any necessary rigmarole) is.
I do understand and accept the argument that we're at an intermediate level of capability, better than it was and not as good as it's going to be. But the path we're taking, in my opinion, is far, far too painful.
--Percy

This message is a reply to:
 Message 9 by Omnivorous, posted 10-22-2015 4:43 PM Omnivorous has seen this message but not replied

  
Percy
Member
Posts: 22391
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 5.2


Message 18 of 96 (771269)
10-23-2015 10:31 AM
Reply to: Message 14 by Rrhain
10-22-2015 9:28 PM


Rrhain writes:
No device that exists can listen in on your conversation and pick out the "important bits."
Oh, that would be neat, but what I had in mind was just listening in on the conversation when my wife calls me on my cell when I'm on my way home.
Devices are requiring less and less power, battery technology is improving, so "always listening" will come eventually.
That said, most of the rest is already available. Both Windows Phone and Android have the ability to set up reminders based upon your location. That's one of the big selling points of Cortana on Windows Phone: You can tell it, "Remind me to X when I'm near Y," where "Y" is something vague like "A grocery store." I think iOS can do this, too. The system monitors your GPS location and if you are near a location that fits what you specified, it will remind you to do whatever it is you said.
I usually answer claims like this by requesting a demo. Invariably it comes up short, involves a lot of touching and clicking, takes a long time, or all three. My favorite contest is, "Make a list of five items: milk, cream, eggs, cheese, yogurt." I pull out my notepad and am done in literally seconds, minutes ahead of everyone else.
But to your larger point, that's already happening. Many television shows are online only. Hulu, Netflix, Amazon, and Yahoo all have programs that aren't available on TV.
Omigod, just remembering where a show is will be a battle. And you'll need a Hulu subscription, a Netflix subscription, and an Amazon account. And depending upon whose interface to Amazon you're using, you'll likely need a computer to look up and purchase the show, and then only then do you go to your device where you'll find it's been placed on your watchlist.
TiVo has the right idea, I think. You look up a show and they tell you all the places it can be found, or at least the common places. Still need all the different subscriptions and accounts, though.
So why not the NFL? Technologies change. We had this discussion when we shifted from SD to HD signal.
Actually, I don't think we did. The transition from SD to HD is one I think they got right. Both systems worked at the same time for at least a decade.
--Percy

This message is a reply to:
 Message 14 by Rrhain, posted 10-22-2015 9:28 PM Rrhain has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 20 by Rrhain, posted 10-25-2015 6:04 PM Percy has replied

  
Percy
Member
Posts: 22391
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 5.2


Message 19 of 96 (771380)
10-25-2015 3:29 PM


Oh, gee, wasn't that wonderful.
We weren't home to watch the Bills/Jaguars from London on Yahoo this morning, it can't be recorded off the Internet, it's not available for replay, so I guess I won't be seeing this football game. Gosh, golly, more incompletely thought through and implemented modern technology, wow. I've just started watching what I'm sure will be a more than satisfying five minute game summary.
My wife and I have a football game we plan to watch later. It's being broadcast right now, but that doesn't matter because it's on regular TV and we're recording it.
--Percy

Replies to this message:
 Message 21 by Rrhain, posted 10-25-2015 6:23 PM Percy has replied

  
Rrhain
Member
Posts: 6351
From: San Diego, CA, USA
Joined: 05-03-2003


Message 20 of 96 (771397)
10-25-2015 6:04 PM
Reply to: Message 18 by Percy
10-23-2015 10:31 AM


Percy responds to me:
quote:
My favorite contest is, "Make a list of five items: milk, cream, eggs, cheese, yogurt." I pull out my notepad and am done in literally seconds, minutes ahead of everyone else.
While I see your point, you've made some unstated assumptions. What do you mean by "make a list"? That seems like a very simple question, but it really isn't. In order for the computer to know what you mean for it to do, it has to understand what you mean by "make a list." What application is associated with "list"?
With Android, you can say, "OK, Google." Then you can say, "Remind me to get milk, cream, eggs, cheese, yogurt," and it will do so...so long as you then tell it when and/or where. "Make a list" isn't defined because there is no association between what "list" means and what app it's supposed to use (there is no default "list" app.)
But, there is a reminder app. So if you say, "OK, Google. Remind me when I get to Ralph's to buy milk, cream, eggs, cheese, and yogurt," it will put it on your Reminders. And when you drive near Ralph's, it will buzz you to see your list.
This is a variation of the regional problem I mentioned: Is it "list" or is it "reminder"?
quote:
Omigod, just remembering where a show is will be a battle.
That's not a technology problem, per se, but rather a marketing problem. That is, none of the companies want to work with each other lest you not watch their program but rather some other company's. There are devices such as TiVo that can aggregate this information, but it will require the media production company to conform to standards in order for it to show up as a "channel" on your end. There's no reason why it can't be displayed nicely. TiVo does try this a bit, as you note: You can search for a title and it will show you all the various locations it can be found: Broadcast, On Demand, Hulu, Netflix, etc. Choose the delivery method you want and it will provision it accordingly. What it can't do is let you browse programming like broadcast networks. That's partly because on-demand services like Netflix and Hulu aren't tied to dates and times and thus you don't browse them the way you would broadcast.
quote:
The transition from SD to HD is one I think they got right. Both systems worked at the same time for at least a decade.
And we're in that right now with more a-la-carte methods. You can still watch broadcast. And yeah, you're going to have to pay for all the various accounts. For whatever reason, the other providers don't want to work with the cable/satellite companies to aggregate the content into their On Demand section, probably because they don't want to pay the fee to the cable/satellite companies to gain access to the distribution network.
Way back when when HBO was first coming around, it was its own service (at least, where we were...we didn't have cable. We did have HBO, though.) But then cable and HBO struck a deal so that you could subscribe to HBO as an additional service to basic cable. There's no reason why Netflix can't do this, technologically. It's just a question of marketing. This was a big suggestion I made when I was working at Sony back in 2000. Sony had a major contract with Cablevision in New York. They were going to replace every single set top box with a new "smart" box from Sony. Among the many functions this box would have was an expanded on-demand section. I was telling them that they could really make this amazing if they could strike deals with the various TV channels and maybe even with Netflix (which was only 3 years old) to get their content stored so that it could be accessed on-demand. Who would need a TiVo if you could call up last week's episode of Law and Order through your cable box?
Unfortunately, the problem is the media providers don't want that. How can they advertise to you if you aren't forced to go to their site? That's going to be the big sticking point for a lot of what you're complaining about with regard to television programming: Who gets to advertise to you? There's a lot of money to be made and nobody wants to let anybody else have any of it if it can be avoided.

Rrhain

Thank you for your submission to Science. Your paper was reviewed by a jury of seventh graders so that they could look for balance and to allow them to make up their own minds. We are sorry to say that they found your paper "bogus," specifically describing the section on the laboratory work "boring." We regret that we will be unable to publish your work at this time.

Minds are like parachutes. Just because you've lost yours doesn't mean you can use mine.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 18 by Percy, posted 10-23-2015 10:31 AM Percy has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 22 by Percy, posted 10-26-2015 11:30 AM Rrhain has replied

  
Rrhain
Member
Posts: 6351
From: San Diego, CA, USA
Joined: 05-03-2003


Message 21 of 96 (771400)
10-25-2015 6:23 PM
Reply to: Message 19 by Percy
10-25-2015 3:29 PM


Re: Oh, gee, wasn't that wonderful.
Percy writes:
quote:
it can't be recorded off the Internet, it's not available for replay, so I guess I won't be seeing this football game. Gosh, golly, more incompletely thought through and implemented modern technology
That's not a bug. That's a feature. There is advertising money to be made. By controlling how you see the content, they can make sure that the advertising money is collected. It's a big reason why various media providers have taken their sweet time in making their content available. Yeah, the Beatles had their beef with Apple over the use of "Apple" as a corporate name, but the other reason they wouldn't release the catalog to iTunes was due to marketing rights. They wanted more money than what Apple was willing to pay.
The reason you can't see the game is because no marketing plan could be designed to make money off having it stored to be played later. And especially with digital content, there are ways to prevent you from copying material. That was one of the things we were testing with our set top box at Sony: Detection of the appropriate copyright signal and making sure it was transferred to the display device. I forget the name of the standard, but it's a bit in the digital stream that is used to determine if you are able to copy the stream.
This is even part of physical medium. It's why the DVD you bought in the UK (Region 2) won't play on your DVD player you bought in the US (Region 1). They don't want you to buy DVDs cheaply in one region and then sell them outside that region. They have a marketing plan and don't want you mucking it up.
Technologically, there is no reason for you not to be able to watch the game when you want on whatever device you want.
It's the accountants who are standing in your way.

Rrhain

Thank you for your submission to Science. Your paper was reviewed by a jury of seventh graders so that they could look for balance and to allow them to make up their own minds. We are sorry to say that they found your paper "bogus," specifically describing the section on the laboratory work "boring." We regret that we will be unable to publish your work at this time.

Minds are like parachutes. Just because you've lost yours doesn't mean you can use mine.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 19 by Percy, posted 10-25-2015 3:29 PM Percy has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 23 by Percy, posted 10-26-2015 11:46 AM Rrhain has replied

  
Percy
Member
Posts: 22391
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 5.2


Message 22 of 96 (771467)
10-26-2015 11:30 AM
Reply to: Message 20 by Rrhain
10-25-2015 6:04 PM


Rrhain writes:
quote:
My favorite contest is, "Make a list of five items: milk, cream, eggs, cheese, yogurt." I pull out my notepad and am done in literally seconds, minutes ahead of everyone else.
While I see your point, you've made some unstated assumptions. What do you mean by "make a list"? That seems like a very simple question, but it really isn't.
Translation: "I want to take something simple and make it complicated."
You're being a technology apologist. Only in the minds and code and databases of implementers must lists be complicated. What's behind the scenes for lists can be incredibly complicated, but for the consumer it must remain simple.
Apple's success is because they do the least worst job of keeping human/computer interactions simple.
With Android, you can say, "OK, Google." Then you can say, "Remind me to get milk, cream, eggs, cheese, yogurt," and it will do so...so long as you then tell it when and/or where. "Make a list" isn't defined because there is no association between what "list" means and what app it's supposed to use (there is no default "list" app.)
Something that was actually smart, like say a person, would have no trouble with this, asking questions if there was any ambiguity. I'm not saying our current technology can't do amazing things, and in fact have already called it amazing in this very thread. What I'm saying is that it's not very smart. In fact, it's pretty dumb. Anyone who wants to work the word "smart" into a marketing campaign for current technology should use the phrase "smarter than they were." That's about the most that can be said that is actually true.
But, there is a reminder app. So if you say, "OK, Google. Remind me when I get to Ralph's to buy milk, cream, eggs, cheese, and yogurt," it will put it on your Reminders. And when you drive near Ralph's, it will buzz you to see your list.
Channeling Felger, "Screw your app." Just seamlessly do your job without requiring repeats, explanation's that "Ralphs is the Corner Market, no, the one of Fifth Street," and later, "No, I wasn't talking to you you stupid app, I was talking to my wife, any idiot would know that."
This is a variation of the regional problem I mentioned: Is it "list" or is it "reminder"?
A perfect example of complicating the simple. For the user it's a just a list, but the technologists will muck it all up and require the consumer to keep in mind the distinction between a "list" and "reminder", and they'll start introducing terms like "active list" or "smart list" or "dynamic list" or marketing terms like "insto-list". Technology is best when it blends into the background, but the "smart device" movement is making the idiosyncrasies of their strangely behaved devices the centerpiece.
quote:
Omigod, just remembering where a show is will be a battle.
That's not a technology problem, per se, but rather a marketing problem.
Putting a different modifier on the word "problem" doesn't make it not a problem. If you tell the consumer that marketing, not technology, is the reason he can't watch Buffalo/Jacksonville, he will not be responding, "Oh, well that's okay then."
I'll say once again that I *do* think the technology is fantastic, it's just the lies being built around it I object to. Calling it marketing *is* more accurate, but now you're drawing fine distinctions not readily apparent to your average consumer. As I said earlier, most people have no idea that all the time they waste trying to make their smart devices do the things claimed for them is because of reprehensibly low software and hardware quality. Consumers often blame themselves for the problems, and help lines and such do much to encourage this, a win-win for the technology companies.
I understand the competitive forces at work causing the delivery of patchwork features that don't work together, but in the same way all radio and television companies were able to get their shows broadcast to the same radios and TVs, technology companies in the current age have to figure out the analogous thing and deliver stuff that all works together, even while it is all evolving. When they don't do this we should punish them by not buying their stuff. But we buy it anyway and blame ourselves when it doesn't really work very well. And then there are others of us who convince ourselves that it's all really fine and dandy.
Way back when when HBO was first coming around, it was its own service...etc...etc...
Yes, yes, I get the whole HBO and Sony thing and how nobody wanted to give away the set top. We all lived through the same era, and a number of us lived it while working in hi-tech. But until consumers start staying away from the bleeding edge in significant numbers they are going to continue to be the big losers.
--Percy
Edited by Percy, : Grammar.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 20 by Rrhain, posted 10-25-2015 6:04 PM Rrhain has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 24 by Tangle, posted 10-26-2015 2:38 PM Percy has replied
 Message 28 by Rrhain, posted 11-03-2015 3:27 AM Percy has replied

  
Percy
Member
Posts: 22391
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 5.2


Message 23 of 96 (771472)
10-26-2015 11:46 AM
Reply to: Message 21 by Rrhain
10-25-2015 6:23 PM


Re: Oh, gee, wasn't that wonderful.
Rrhain writes:
quote:
it can't be recorded off the Internet, it's not available for replay, so I guess I won't be seeing this football game. Gosh, golly, more incompletely thought through and implemented modern technology
That's not a bug. That's a feature.
A feature for who? Features are supposed to be for consumers, not vendors. It certainly wasn't a feature for me, and certainly not for everyone else who wanted to see the game but didn't.
There is advertising money to be made.
Then make me watch the advertising when I watch the replay, just like Hulu. Or charge money for the replay with no advertising. This isn't rocket science. That they didn't even have these most obvious of options available shows how poorly this was thought out. Or maybe after Yahoo paid the NFL $20 million for the rights to this game there wasn't enough left to over to get anything right.
The summary of the game I watched on Yahoo used the HD aspect ratio but low res. I watched some post game comments about the game on ComCast Sportsnet New England, and they said they had the game itself piped into the studio and that that was low res, too. Yahoo spent $20 million to broadcast a game in low res? My God, I can watch Murder She Wrote reruns in higher res than that! What were they thinking???
Here's a fun little article: Yahoo's first-ever live stream of an NFL game was a disaster for many
How could this happen? It's an all too familiar symptom of the technology companies attitude that they can throw any ill thought out technology at us, no matter how bad, and we'll buy it. Sure, some products fail or all but fail, but by and large the technology companies are making money. Because we're behaving like dupes. The population of early adopters used to be very small, but now it's like everyone's an early adopter, and the technology companies have lost the ability to discriminate between what's deserves to be released and what should continue internal development, or maybe even be cancelled. "Hey, they'll buy it, they always buy it, so ship it."
--Percy

This message is a reply to:
 Message 21 by Rrhain, posted 10-25-2015 6:23 PM Rrhain has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 29 by Rrhain, posted 11-03-2015 3:38 AM Percy has replied

  
Tangle
Member
Posts: 9489
From: UK
Joined: 10-07-2011
Member Rating: 4.9


(1)
Message 24 of 96 (771502)
10-26-2015 2:38 PM
Reply to: Message 22 by Percy
10-26-2015 11:30 AM


Percy writes:
Apple's success is because they do the least worst job of keeping human/computer interactions simple
I don't think so, Apple's interfaces aren't a whole lot simpler than Microsoft's, they're just different and you get to learn the ones you use. Apple's recent success is in product design - they're just beautiful things that work beautifully together. This is because they're in control of the whole package - hardware and software - and can therefore command a premium for design and image, whereas Microsoft have to leave hardware to millions of kit makers that may or may not talk to each other. This is why an Android phone can be either totally crap or damn good depending on the hardware, whilst an iPhone is an iPhone is an iPhone.

Je suis Charlie. Je suis Ahmed. Je suis Juif.
Life, don't talk to me about life - Marvin the Paranoid Android
"Science adjusts it's views based on what's observed.
Faith is the denial of observation so that Belief can be preserved."
- Tim Minchin, in his beat poem, Storm.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 22 by Percy, posted 10-26-2015 11:30 AM Percy has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 25 by Percy, posted 10-26-2015 3:43 PM Tangle has replied

  
Percy
Member
Posts: 22391
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 5.2


Message 25 of 96 (771508)
10-26-2015 3:43 PM
Reply to: Message 24 by Tangle
10-26-2015 2:38 PM


Tangle writes:
Apple's recent success is in product design - they're just beautiful things that work beautifully together.
Yes, that's much more true than what I said.
I think what I said is also true, but Apple does have plenty of examples of bad human interface. The keyboard is a marvel of inconvenience, annoyance and aggravation.
I'm only an occasional Apple user, so while I'm talking about Apple I'll ask a couple usability questions about the Page Up/Page Down keys:
  • When I want the Page Up/Page Down keys on my Mac I use Ctrl-Atl-Up and Ctrl-Alt-Down. Is there an easier way?
  • When I'm Remote Desktop'd from my Mac to my Windows machine, I cannot find any equivalent on the keyboard to the Page Up/Page Down keys. Anyone know any?
--Percy

This message is a reply to:
 Message 24 by Tangle, posted 10-26-2015 2:38 PM Tangle has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 26 by Tangle, posted 10-26-2015 5:28 PM Percy has replied

  
Tangle
Member
Posts: 9489
From: UK
Joined: 10-07-2011
Member Rating: 4.9


Message 26 of 96 (771512)
10-26-2015 5:28 PM
Reply to: Message 25 by Percy
10-26-2015 3:43 PM


Don't use it myself but maybe this?
Official Apple Support Community

Je suis Charlie. Je suis Ahmed. Je suis Juif.
Life, don't talk to me about life - Marvin the Paranoid Android
"Science adjusts it's views based on what's observed.
Faith is the denial of observation so that Belief can be preserved."
- Tim Minchin, in his beat poem, Storm.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 25 by Percy, posted 10-26-2015 3:43 PM Percy has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 27 by Percy, posted 10-27-2015 7:32 AM Tangle has not replied

  
Percy
Member
Posts: 22391
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 5.2


Message 27 of 96 (771538)
10-27-2015 7:32 AM
Reply to: Message 26 by Tangle
10-26-2015 5:28 PM


Thank you!
--Percy

This message is a reply to:
 Message 26 by Tangle, posted 10-26-2015 5:28 PM Tangle has not replied

  
Rrhain
Member
Posts: 6351
From: San Diego, CA, USA
Joined: 05-03-2003


Message 28 of 96 (772014)
11-03-2015 3:27 AM
Reply to: Message 22 by Percy
10-26-2015 11:30 AM


Percy responds to me:
quote:
Translation: "I want to take something simple and make it complicated."
Translation: "I didn't read the post."
Try again, Percy. Pay attention to the following sentence:
What do you mean by "make a list"?
Pair that with the following sentence:
there is no default "list" app
What do you think that might mean? Oh, the concept of a list is pretty simple, but unless you teach the computer what a "list" is and what app you're supposed to use when making one, how on earth do you think it's going to figure out what you mean? Try telling a two-year-old to "make a list." Do they even know that word yet? Have you taught them what it means to "make a list"? Could they actually grip the pencil and spell out what it is that you want them to do?
Of course not.
If you don't know what "make a list" means, why would you expect the computer to be able to do it? Just because you can create a syntactically correct sentence? Is there a reason that "Make a note" or "Remind me" is so much more problematic for you? Yeah, it'd be lovely if "Make a list" were a command. But it'd be lovely if it spoke every single language on the planet and were able to distinguish every single inflected form that could be made regarding a request for it to remember something and remind you of it at the appropriate moment.
That's never going to happen. Even humans can't do that. So is there a reason why you're insisting on using the right-handed scissors in your left hand and then blaming the scissors?
I've been using it myself: "OK, Google. Remind me to buy soap." It then asks me if I want to be reminded at a certain time or when I get to a certain place. "When I get to Ralph's." And presto, there's a reminder in my phone to "Buy soap" that automatically buzzes me when I drive to Ralphs.
That you're going apoplectic over the word "list" compared to "reminder" is quite telling. And it all goes back to the fact that you didn't pay attention to the post you were responding to:
How is the computer supposed to know what "make a list" means when there is no application that is connected to the word "list"? There is no "list" app in Android. You can download certain ones like Evernote, but the OS doesn't have any hooks to make that the "default list app" so that when you say, "Make a list," it knows to use Evernote. There are some hooks for various apps: If you say, "Send a message," it will use the basic text message, but you can say, "Send to Twitter," and it will know to post to Twitter.
And we're back to what I posted right at the very beginning: You aren't going to find a computer that will be able to be always on without sucking your battery in mere hours that is capable of listening at all times and able to distinguish multiple voices simultaneously let alone be able to figure out when you're talking to one person and when you're talking to it. For one thing, you ignore all the other cues that humans have to determine who is being talked to: Where are you looking? If you're looking at me, you're talking to me. How is your phone supposed to know who you're looking at when it's in your pocket?
Yeah, it'd be really nice if a phone were as smart as a person. They aren't. Get over it.
Screw your pipe dream.
And yes, putting a modifier on the problem does make it not a problem. You are blaming technology for something that technology did not create and cannot fix. If the marketers don't want you to be able to access their content except on their terms, no amount of Apple engineering is going to change that. The problem isn't the technology: It's the marketing.
quote:
but in the same way all radio and television companies were able to get their shows broadcast to the same radios and TVs
It was called "standardization," it was imposed by the government, and it meant that there wasn't an improvement in broadcasting for decades.
You think the computer market is going to stand for that? For crying out loud, countries can't even get their power connectors standardized world-wide. You think that's gonna happen for software?

Rrhain

Thank you for your submission to Science. Your paper was reviewed by a jury of seventh graders so that they could look for balance and to allow them to make up their own minds. We are sorry to say that they found your paper "bogus," specifically describing the section on the laboratory work "boring." We regret that we will be unable to publish your work at this time.

Minds are like parachutes. Just because you've lost yours doesn't mean you can use mine.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 22 by Percy, posted 10-26-2015 11:30 AM Percy has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 30 by Percy, posted 11-03-2015 9:14 AM Rrhain has replied

  
Rrhain
Member
Posts: 6351
From: San Diego, CA, USA
Joined: 05-03-2003


Message 29 of 96 (772015)
11-03-2015 3:38 AM
Reply to: Message 23 by Percy
10-26-2015 11:46 AM


Re: Oh, gee, wasn't that wonderful.
Percy responds to me:
quote:
A feature for who?
The people marketing the content. You did read my post before responding, yes? You are again blaming technology for a marketing issue. Technology did not make the problem and technology will not fix the problem. If the people who own the content don't want to give it to you in a way that you want, no amount of Human Factors Engineering can solve that problem.
No matter much iTunes can provide music to you, it cannot give you music that is not in its catalog and if the Beatles don't want to give their music to Apple to put on iTunes, then no amount of fixing the putrescence that is iTunes is going to make them change their minds.
quote:
How could this happen?
Did you read the article to find out? There appeared to be a very clear distinction in technologies that affected how it appeared. You could watch the game a minute behind reality which resulted in a cleaner picture due to a more reliable stream, or you could try to watch it as it was happening and get poor quality.
This makes sense given how the Internet works.
And it's something that Yahoo can't solve because they aren't an ISP. They can do lots of things to make sure there is good signal on their end, but if your Internet connection is crappy, they can't solve that.
And if you don't want to watch the football game on Yahoo because you don't like the quality, then don't.
They'll get the message and either abandon the project or work to make it better.
That's the way it is with everything.

Rrhain

Thank you for your submission to Science. Your paper was reviewed by a jury of seventh graders so that they could look for balance and to allow them to make up their own minds. We are sorry to say that they found your paper "bogus," specifically describing the section on the laboratory work "boring." We regret that we will be unable to publish your work at this time.

Minds are like parachutes. Just because you've lost yours doesn't mean you can use mine.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 23 by Percy, posted 10-26-2015 11:46 AM Percy has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 31 by Percy, posted 11-03-2015 9:48 AM Rrhain has seen this message but not replied

  
Percy
Member
Posts: 22391
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 5.2


Message 30 of 96 (772019)
11-03-2015 9:14 AM
Reply to: Message 28 by Rrhain
11-03-2015 3:27 AM


Rrhain writes:
Percy responds to me:
quote:
Translation: "I want to take something simple and make it complicated."
Translation: "I didn't read the post."
It doesn't seem like you read mine either. Despite that I repeatedly called the technology fantastic, you concluded I was criticizing the technology. I wasn't. I was criticizing the way the technology is packaged and marketed. You seemed to be making the same criticisms, so I don't understand why you made your points as if I opposed them
Part of what I was saying was that the technology is marketed as smarter than it really is. You interpreted this as a demand for technology as smart as people, but it was actually a demand for accurate marketing of what the technology can really do. An example of inaccurate marketing is Apple's Siri commercials from a year or two ago. I wish Siri could interactively assist with my cooking, but it can't. If you want dinner to be late, cook with Siri.
Here's Peyton Manning in a Buick commercial:
If they're not *way* exaggerating how well their voice interactive feature works, then I'm stunned. Anyone out there have a Buick with this feature?
But there's a bigger downside to the technology not working as well as advertised, because it actually makes things worse. Sticking with the car example, the deepest period of driver inattention is probably right after you've given a command and are trying to figure out what your car is actually doing.
I've been using it myself: "OK, Google. Remind me to buy soap." It then asks me if I want to be reminded at a certain time or when I get to a certain place. "When I get to Ralph's." And presto, there's a reminder in my phone to "Buy soap" that automatically buzzes me when I drive to Ralphs.
I don't have a smart phone and can't test this, but for the sake of discussion let's say this really works as you describe. I consider that pretty amazing, but it's just one patch of safe ground in a mine field of stuff that doesn't work as claimed.
--Percy
Edited by Percy, : Typo.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 28 by Rrhain, posted 11-03-2015 3:27 AM Rrhain has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 33 by Rrhain, posted 11-04-2015 12:46 AM Percy has replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024