| last updated:03 Oct 2003 05: 16 Webword time, or 03 Oct 2003 10:16 UK time |
 |
| Webword Statistics - Recent Comments (Comments added for week ending Sun 28 Sep 2003) | View Other Weeks |
| Building a Digitally Inclusive Society | Sun 28 Sep |
| - This is a document on Digital Divide. This document describes the situation in Hong Kong and governments programmes to address the Digital Divide issue. |
| Sun 28 Sep 12:04 | Snollygoster | We, the lofty elite, are certain those who are offline are that way because of financial and educational drought. Is it impossible for people to scan the horizon and decide they can live without The Great Distraction? I must have overlooked the bones of The Great Unwashed drying in the desert sun, staggered across the dunes, lying in testament to their tireless search for the Internet Oasis. How arrogant. |
| Sun 28 Sep 15:58 | Anonymous | Have to agree. I've often wondered at the magical thinking some of those in the ivory tower apply to computers and the internet. (of course always with caps: Internet, Web, etc). I often wonder if they aren't on the wrong side of the divide. If there is a divide, perhaps we should look into the one where people form a simple-minded dichotomy to explain the complex problems of the world, those who don't, and those who can count to three or higher. |
| Digital television fails usability test | Thu 25 Sep |
| Compared with analogue TV, digital TV provides many more useful features; but you can only access those features by using the remote control and on-screen displays. Our research indicates that unless improvements are made, then about 2 million people will not easily be able to use digital TV in its current form. (Comments: Read the full report, 87 pages, PDF format Digital Television For All. Thanks again Gabriel White.) |
| Thu 25 Sep 18:19 | Matt Round | I've recently used two different Freeview (free UK digital TV) boxes (only used one for any length of time though), and was appalled by both. Firstly, there are way too many buttons, and they're not clearly grouped or labelled. You've got buttons with colours on, buttons with tiny words/abbreviations (X, OK, TXT, MENU, INFO, etc.), and direction buttons. I can't see the point of the colours, red is used to trigger 'interactive' features but the rest have no clear role. Surely it just needed something like the 4 directions, a Yes/OK button, No/Back, and 2 or 3 buttons for specific main features (e.g. Settings, Interactive, Programme Guide)? The menus look & feel unnecessarily complicated, and aren't always consistent. Little or no thought has been put into optimising key tasks - choosing channels in the guide was painfully sluggish. It would've made sense to do things like make up/down automatically bring up the guide and get the user straight into channel-hopping, maybe combined with left/right for paging through quickly. Certain channels allow you to press the red button for extra features. The extras I saw weren't presented in a slick, easy-to-use way, it was all slightly muddled and clunky. The developers clearly haven't learned a thing from recent experiences with the web, games consoles and mobile phones. |
| Sat 27 Sep 04:58 | Philip Chalmers | As usual it's a matter of economics. Are enough people willing to pay a bit more for a more usable set-up, e.g. a handset with bigger buttons and labels, and possibly with its own menu display? Would they mind having to order another enhanced handset from the same maker (lock-in!) because this kind of set-up would be very hard to use with a generic handset? If goverments want to make accessibility regulations about digital set-top boxes, who pays and how? (The answer is probably: non-disabled users, either via taxes or via higher prices). And what is the most efficient way of paying for the enhanced-accessibility models in terms of total cost to the economy as a whole? |
| Sat 27 Sep 10:22 | Michael | Interface usability is the least of Digital TV's problems. There are several aspects of TV as we know it that are fundamentally broken on today's digital systems: - You can't program your VCR to tape shows, unless you limit yourself to a single channel and keep the cable box on that channel. - You can't record one show while watching another. - You can't use multiple TVs without multiple cable boxes. 'Cable-ready' TVs no longer are. A PVR like TiVo solves the first two problems, but then you get a new batch of problems - you can't record a show in one room and watch it in another, you can't save a tape of a show you like, and so on. We switched from digital TV back to analog a few months ago - that shouldn't have felt like a massive improvement, but it did. |
| CPSC, Segway LLC Announce Voluntary Recall to Upgrade Software on Segway™ Human Transporters | Fri 26 Sep |
| (gizmodo.net) Under certain operating conditions, particularly when the batteries are near the end of charge, some Segway HTs may not deliver enough power, allowing the rider to fall. This can happen if the rider speeds up abruptly, encounters an obstacle, or continues to ride after receiving a low-battery alert. |
| Sat 27 Sep 05:06 | Philip Chalmers | Looks like it's inherently more difficult to design relatively safe failure modes for the Segway than for e.g. cars or planes. Look out for: Lawsuits, particularly from third parties claimimg they sufered injury or loss when a Segway misbehaved as described in the article. Legislation requiring Segway users to have at least third-party insurance. Increased insurance premiums for Segway users. Requirements for Segway users to pass a Segway driving test. |
| A Complaint Box Turns Frustration Into Fun | Thu 25 Sep |
| (New York Times) The outpouring of hotel horror stories led him to create This Is Broken (www.thisisbroken.com), a forum where consumers can air their gripes about everything from hidden hotel costs to baffling error messages to bad road signs. |
| Thu 25 Sep 08:08 | Anonymous | Quick question: What This Is Broken post got anyone, anywhere, to 'fix' their broken product? Or is this just to diffuse the anger of the (otherwise completely impotent) user? |
| Thu 25 Sep 08:29 | Anonymous | Quick answer: Read the whole article. |
| Thu 25 Sep 09:36 | Arne Gleason | A visit to the www.thisisbroken.com site made my morning. I especially enjoyed the “exit sign” (entry for September 24, 2003)…such lovely blue signs. |
| Thu 25 Sep 14:34 | Anonymous | Quick reread of the article: Changes = little and none. There may well be something in the future, but it is mostly about letting off steam. Not getting anything fixed. |
| Fri 26 Sep 04:25 | Michael Batey | Just tried the link - it appears to be, um, broken. |
| Fri 26 Sep 09:18 | Anonymous | Seems to be working right now. You do have to subscribe to NYT online to access it though. |
| Fri 26 Sep 10:04 | Sneed | We enjoy supporting registration-required web sites. Who on earth wants to support the free and open flow of information? Lock our doors; it's a dangerous world out there! |
| Fri 26 Sep 11:13 | Michael Batey | Sorry, it was thisisbroken.com that wasn't working - seems okay now though. Totally agree about the registration issue Sneed - the New York Times is a newspaper, not a consultancy. |
| Fri 26 Sep 11:14 | Michael Batey | Sorry, it was thisisbroken.com that wasn't working - seems okay now though. Totally agree about the registration issue, Sneed. The Independent in the UK has recently started _charging_ for content. They're a newspaper, not a consultancy - aren't they? |
| Fri 26 Sep 13:58 | Anonymous | This effort is only a few months old - how much change do you expect in such a short time? How much change have *your* efforts produced? I thought so. |
| Fri 26 Sep 21:27 | Eric | I far prefer the www.baddesigns.com site - more focussed on things which are bad by design, and not accident or evolution like the thisisbroken.com site. The former also goes into more detail discussing the problems. |
| The Coming Search Engine War, Part 1 | Wed 24 Sep |
| (ClickZ) Google is the king of search. There, I said it. Its good to be king, but, as Netscape learned, its often hard to stay king. Microsoft is making rumblings it intends to launch its own search engine and join this battle. Google and Yahoo! should be concerned. |
| Wed 24 Sep 10:29 | Jim | What's Yahoo?!? |
| Wed 24 Sep 16:09 | Philip Chalmers | The precedents quoted in the article are not as threatening to Google as the article makes out: MS used their control of the OS to unseat Netscape - and got into an anti-trust case as a result. And Netscape shot itself in the foot by releasing Netscape 4 (poor standards support, buggy) to complete against IE 4. MSN is the default search engine for IE but this didn't stop Google becoming the search king. Lotus were wrong-footed by the switch to Windows, bu this won't apply to Google because Google works with any browser. And, while Lotus 1-2-3 was a very good spreadsheet, AmiPro (buggy, and you needed to understand WP sylesheets to make it work) and Approach (dBase with a GUI) were no match for Word and Access. Google so far show none of the complacency by which other market leaders let MS overtake them. Google will take MS seriously. They should be OK provided they don't panic as Netscape did and release a defective product. |
| Wed 24 Sep 22:59 | Lyle Kantrovich | I love Google because they invented a better mousetrap. I'm a heavy-duty search power user kinda guy. If Microsoft makes a better tool I'll use it and thank them for it. Some people forget that there was a time when people thought web search was 'owned' by Yahoo and that investments in new search entrants were mere sacrifices to the Gods. Competition is good. Competition brought us Google. Competition is good. Competition will either bring us a better Google or a Google killer that we'll love even more than Google. Competition is good. Microsoft is not immune to competition. The Clickz author says 'I argue that Microsoft's battle against Google will be waged not with technology or features, but with marketing and product positioning. It is a marketing battle, not a technology showdown.' BUZZ! Wrong answer! Google doesn't sell technology or features any more than Coca-Cola sells soft drinks. Google sells an experience. Marketing won't help MS kill Google. They have to deliver a better (or at least comparable) experience and only then does marketing play a role. Google should (and I'm sure does) have MS on their list of competitors. If I were them though, I'd be afraid of the next Google - the small competitor that comes out of nowhere with a compelling product and end-user experience that can't be easily mimicked. |
| Thu 25 Sep 00:00 | Anonymous | Real users are sheep. They go wherever their 'Home' button takes them. If Microsoft wants to own search it need only flex its muscle and Google will be the Macintosh of the web world. |
| Thu 25 Sep 08:35 | Anonymous | My 65 year old dad remarked the other day 'Mr. Google is my friend. I have a question, I type it in, I get an answer.' Users are not sheep. They want to get their jobs to be easier, or their motorhomes fixed cheaply, or quicker information on the new medical condition they just got diagnosed with. They are not sheep, talk, and the word has and will get around. |
| Thu 25 Sep 10:51 | Anonymous | You fail to mention that you reconfigured daddy's brower to launch Google as his homepage. If you had not intervened, he would still be grazing from MSN.com, Netscape.com or his ISP's opening page. Users are so much like sheep I make a tidy sum selling gold-plated shears to web developers. If talk had the power to change the world, we'd be debating whether Mac or Linux is better and Bill Gates would be serving my kids fries at the drive-thru. |
| Thu 25 Sep 10:58 | Anonymous | The fact that your pappy thinks of 'Mr. Google' as a person indicates Pop is a sheep and Google is carrying a crook. Or maybe Mr. Google is the wolf. Hmmmm. It's people. Soylent green is made out of people! They're making our food out of people. Next thing they'll be breeding us like cattle for food. You've gotta tell them. You've gotta tell them! |
| Fri 26 Sep 14:04 | Anonymous | Good grief. I have *not* reconfigured anything on Dad's system. That was the point - even in the retired crowd Googles reputation is getting around. And his 'Mr. Google' comment was a joke. Your attitude towards people is dismal. I whoever it is that is saddled with using whatever it is that you help make. Feh - used to be some good discussions here. Looks like Slashdot is spilling over now. Cya. |
| Fri 26 Sep 20:10 | Anonymous | That's right, the Slashdot crowd is here and your name is Anonymous Coward. |
| Court Hangs Up on Anti-Telemarketing List | Thu 25 Sep |
| Several telemarketing firms and the Direct Marketing Association sued to block the measure in January, saying it would violate free-speech laws and decimate the industry. |
| Fri 26 Sep 05:38 | Philip Chalmers | Legalsim is the price of democracy - it's a healthy sign that the government is not above the law. And in this case both the judge and the politicians appear to have got it right - the judge said the FCC would have the authority to maintain andenforce a do-not-call list, and the politicians are looking for ways in which to amend the law. |
| AlphaOmega Soft iSeePet | Sat 20 Sep |
| (gizmodo.net) Even My Cat Can Set It Up (Dans Comments: How do we run usability tests with pets?) |
| Wed 24 Sep 05:05 | Gerald | What comes next? ISeeChild? ISeeGrandparents? |
| Thu 25 Sep 02:07 | Morris Cox | ISeeDeadPeople. :> |
| The Cassandra Column: Out of the Mouths Of Babes… (pdf Page 13) | Sun 21 Sep |
| (BCS Interfaces 55) But theres something scary about Fogg which is never scary about Norman or Shneidermans vision in Leonardos Laptop which by comparison are innocent childhood dreams. What scares me about Fogg and doesnt scare me about Shneiderman and Norman is that actually Fogg can realise these nightmares of his which he explains in horrid graphic detail, making John Carpenters The Thing looklike a day at an RSPCA rescue centre. And Fogg understands only too well the impact they will have too. Shneiderman seems blissfully unaware of what might happen if his dreams of a technological blooming arent nipped in the bud. Hes far too nice to think people could be that bad given half the chance. And Norman is only slightly perturbed by implications. But certainly not enough to cause him a sleepless night, raiding his Gulf of Execution fridge. His nightmare vision of the Teddy for example still retains some of its cuddly aspect. Fogg would soon turn that into something even Big Brother would blanch at and would make the Borg look like Little Miss Muffett.But where are the female sages? Wheres Donna Norman? Benita Shneiderman? And whatever the equivalent of BJ Fogg is? He doesnt appear to have a name. Perhaps his parents gave him the initials and left the rest to his imagination? (And what an imagination!) Where are the female visions of a future? Where are the women speculators, dreamers, savants? I have this mild hope that they might be a good deal less scary and uncompromising than the Walden visions offered by the men. And hopefully more accurate as well. |
| Mon 22 Sep 08:43 | Anonymous | The problem could be the inherent optimism inventors have about technology. Quite frankly, these is no nightmare scenario a technologist can't slap the 'It's not a bug, it's a feature' tag on. |
| Mon 22 Sep 12:39 | Anonymous | I think the post-completion error article (p19) is much more interesting. |
| Tue 23 Sep 00:06 | Anonymous | I want to make it possible for people to make comments on my weblog site (just like wut I'm doing now), but I have no idea what to do. Please help!!~~~ |
| Wed 24 Sep 10:32 | Bill | I'm sorry, did you expect me to spend more time than it took me to write this message to figure out what your summary of that article meant? Yeah, riiiiiiiiiiight. |
| SAP | Sat 13 Sep |
| is an ERP (Enterprise Resource Planning System) and a whole lot more. Unfortunately, it is difficult to implement and configure, and novice users find it to be overwhelming. The good news for SAP is that just about any person who has used it will tell you that it is very powerful. Furthermore, once it is installed and configured, and users are properly trained, it can provide significant ROI for a company. I have direct experience with SAP. The user interface has frustrated me very much, although I keep telling myself that it is a good system. I know that expert users love it. So, I stick to it and keep learning. But, I need to express some frustration with the interface so lets take a look at the login screen. I want to point out three things that drive me nuts. First, in the upper left hand corner (Item 1) you will see a strange looking icon. It sort of looks like a rectangle with a trapezoid of some sort on top. It allows you to restore, minimize, and move the window as well as some other special functions. I dont have a problem with the functionality but I do have a problem with the contrast. The light blue on the dark blue is terrible. This same color scheme shows up all over. It is the default color scheme, and while I like the colors, I hate the low contrast. It makes it difficult to use the interface. Secondly, to change your password you need to fill in your username and password and then click on the New Password button (Item 2). Ive needed to change my password a few times in SAP and each time I really have to think about what to do. I always want to just click the New Password button. Im not allowed, of course, then I need to think back about how I did it in the past, or look up the process in an old email or database. Maybe Im just being picky, but it just doesnt make any sense to me. The process doesnt feel right. Finally, the password field is poorly designed. Before you start typing, the field is filled with asterisks (Item 3). Thats right, before you type the field has information in it. First time users are always, and I mean always, confused by this. Ive been using SAP for a while now and it still confuses me. On the good side, when you type at least the cursor moves. But other than that, the password field is terrible. In my opinion it completely violates the population stereotype of password field design. |
| Tue 23 Sep 23:25 | Rick Gardner | It is my experience that an implementation strategy by 'implementation partners' may in fact be influencing the SAP 'expert user' (we called them Subject Matter Experts). These folks are made user go-to people, heroes in their companies. I believe that they believe their livelyhood depends on successful use of the software, hence are extraordinarily positive about the software itself. Also, in some implementations, a social stigma is attached to anyone criticising the methods of implementation, the softwarea, or the implementation partners. Again, expert users adopt an attitude of 'everything is fine' when in fact things may not be fine. I would not suggest that this is limited to SAP implementations. More likely it is attributable to implementation partners and corporate cultures. Also, the cost of an SAP implementation undoubtedly leads to a culture of 'everything is fine'. Senior executives may adopt an attitude of 'if we are spending this much, the #$@$#@ project better be going well'. Thanks for the opportunity to comment. |