Home » The Crystal Hall » The Crystal Hall » If it ain't broke... (...add more features!)
| If it ain't broke... [message #59881] |
Wed, 13 June 2012 19:16  |
 |
 mittfh
Messages: 780
Registered: May 2011
Location: Kenilworth, UK |
|
 
|
|
I suppose this could also go in the Signs thread ("Seen on the entrance to one of the gadgeteer / devisor lab complexes"), but I caught this one on Google+:
https://plus.google.com/102786751626732213960/posts/MQVUZAV9 eVo
"Normal people ... believe that if it ain't broke, don't fix it. Engineers believe that if it ain't broke, it doesn't have enough features yet." ~ Scott Adams
|
|
| |
| Re: If it ain't broke... [message #60136 is a reply to message #60117 ] |
Mon, 18 June 2012 05:36  |
 |
Nicky82
Messages: 1409
Registered: May 2011 |
|
|
|
| Stickmaker wrote on Mon, 18 June 2012 02:40 |
As an engineer - not just by degree, but inclination - I can tell you that one of the most important things engineers - both kinds - need to learn is when to leave well enough alone.
I don't know if any colleges have entire classes on that, but several of my instructors went out of their way to provide anecdotes as to why that is important and necessary.
|
I agreed, one of the most important parts of egineering is to define exactly what you are trying to accomplish, if it works and already does what you want it to do, then why to bother upgrading?
I think that the problem isn't due to engineering but due to marketing, creating 'upgraded' versions of a product to sell to the consumer base to keep the stream of incoming cash going, this can result in an increased complexity with a comparatively little increase of utility and an increased probability of bugs going undetected before reaching the users.
|
|
|
| Re: If it ain't broke... [message #60285 is a reply to message #60136 ] |
Fri, 22 June 2012 02:57 |
|
mittfh
Messages: 780
Registered: May 2011
Location: Kenilworth, UK |
|
|
|
Mentioning nothing in particular...
Macro$loth Orifice...
OK, so each new version adds some new eye candy, but how many of the other features introduced in each version actually get used?
Meanwhile, the same company are trying to develop a single version of their OS which will be run happily across tablets, laptops and PCs (possibly even gaming consoles and smartphones as well)... given the power, screen size, available storage and method of interaction are different across all devices, is it really sensible to use a single OS across the lot?
Of course, the power of the company and its marketing department (who'll probably run a media blitz to announce the new OS on release) means that even if the new OS is a PITA to use on a desktop, millions of lemmings will buy it anyway. Still, I suppose it's not quite as bad as another company whose lemmings snap up replacement computers / media players / smartphones on an almost annual basis because the new version looks cooler than the previous version (and it wouldn't do their street cred any good to be seen with the previous version)...
|
|
|
| Re: If it ain't broke... [message #60296 is a reply to message #60285 ] |
Fri, 22 June 2012 07:22 |
rubberjohn
Messages: 382
Registered: May 2011
Location: South East Coast UK |
|
|
|
Well... they do have to generate repeat sales somehow! Otherwise they'd lose their market position, wouldn't they?
John.
|
|
|
| Re: If it ain't broke... [message #60317 is a reply to message #60296 ] |
Fri, 22 June 2012 18:19 |
|
mittfh
Messages: 780
Registered: May 2011
Location: Kenilworth, UK |
|
|
|
| rubberjohn wrote on Fri, 22 June 2012 12:22 | Well... they do have to generate repeat sales somehow! Otherwise they'd lose their market position, wouldn't they?
John.
|
One thing they were apparently seriously considering a few years ago was the concept of application servers: rather than buying Office in a box, you'd pay them something like $10/month to use a copy (of the full blown package) on their servers.
Evidently someone decided the 'net wasn't quite up to scratch for that plan, but now they've got the nearest equivalent: Office 365, presumably intended to compete against Google Apps.
|
|
|
| Re: If it ain't broke... [message #60331 is a reply to message #60317 ] |
Fri, 22 June 2012 21:26 |
rubberjohn
Messages: 382
Registered: May 2011
Location: South East Coast UK |
|
|
|
My first proper computer came with Windows 95 installed. It also had a variety of useful programmes allowing it to be used straight from the box, 2 word processors, a couple of basic image handlers, a few games and, what became one of my favourite programmes, Microsoft Publisher. I know that a lot of people don't like Publisher but I found that version easy to learn and use... All it needed was a little imagination and some patience.
Maybe I was lucky in that several of the programmes appeared to be developments of the limited programmes that had been installed on my last 'Smart Typewriter' type Word Processor, a Canon ink-jet unit that looked very much like a computer at first glance.
After using this computer for a while I eventually had to replace it with a newer, more capable, unit which came with Windows 98 and a smaller selection of pre-installed programmes. This was just as easy for me to use and, as I still had the back-up discs from my previous computer, I was able to add those programmes I used to the new machine easily. So away I went. I soon found that W98 had rectified the few faults that I felt existed in W95 while providing a known user interface that I was familiar and happy with.
Since then I've had to replace my computer on several occassions and each time I have found that the new machine comes with less and less pre-loaded software and I end up having to spend more money to bring the new machine up to a standard where I can use it! Not only that but each new version of Windows seems to be less intuitive to use and is loaded with more gimmicks, bells and whistles which bulk up the programme without really adding anything to it's usability.
I still use Publisher but the latest version left me in a right state for several days as I tried to find the functions I needed in a completely alien work environment. Even now, a year and a half later, I still can't use it as quickly or effectively as I could use the earlier versions. I believe that the software manufacturers, and particularly Microsoft, have lost sight of the purpose for their software in their rush to create a space in a market that they have already saturated.
Most people today have at least one home computer so the market for new, first time sales, has pretty much dried up in favor of the replacement market. So for the software producers the only other mass market is the 'Ooh Shiny' unnecessary upgrade market, so ably exploited by mobile phone makers, making changes to existing software to make it look more attractive without any regard to whether the changes are beneficial or not.
Sorry that this post seems to have transformed into a rant but I'm not one who believes in 'Change for changes sake' just to sell more product.
John.
|
|
|
| Re: If it ain't broke... [message #60339 is a reply to message #59881 ] |
Sat, 23 June 2012 00:10 |
 |
Sir Lee
Messages: 3110
Registered: May 2005
Location: São Paulo, Brazil |
|
|
|
I think Microsoft is getting desperate because people are not purchasing Office as much as they used to -- and Office is one of Microsoft's major cash cows. I keep hearing these radio spots where they try to convince people that it's "hip" to do stuff with Word or PowerPoint. I think the idea of a DJ using PowerPoint to print flyers is just... sad. Leaving aside the fact that PowerPoint is hardly the best layout tool even in MS-Office, haven't they heard of social networks? That's where these guys do their marketing nowadays.
The thing is, as Tom Scocca of Slate put it, Microsoft Word is cumbersome, inefficient, and obsolete. It's time for it to die. PowerPoint is a tool to make presentations slides -- a thing that became a joke in itself and is begging to be replaced by something less annoying. Outlook is becoming irrelevant because people prefer other ways to check e-mail. Only Excel is still somewhat useful, in my view. But then, I don't do much number-crunching nowadays...
Seriously. If I had some constraint on how many programs I could install in my computer and I had to choose, I think an office suite (MS-Office, LibreOffice, whatever) wouldn't figure in the top 10 places. Maybe not even the top 20.
[Updated on: Sat, 23 June 2012 00:14]
Don't call me Shirley. You will surely make me surly.
--
Sent from my Bugs Industries® bPhone™
|
|
|
| Re: If it ain't broke... [message #60357 is a reply to message #59881 ] |
Sat, 23 June 2012 11:28 |
 |
Aranis
Messages: 730
Registered: October 2008
Location: Mid-Atlantic US |
|
 
|
|
|
I'm curious, Sir Lee, what you might use for so-called "productivity tasks?" Google-Docs/Drive, perhaps?
|
|
| |
| Re: If it ain't broke... [message #60373 is a reply to message #60362 ] |
Sat, 23 June 2012 14:46 |
kraftykeltic
Messages: 70
Registered: May 2011
Location: PA |
|
|
|
| Sojiro wrote on Sat, 23 June 2012 13:09 | One thing that stumps me about the success MS Office still has is that it is very expensive. How can they sell so much of the stuff when the free alternatives are about as good is something I just can't wrap my head around.
|
Very early on, Windoze 1,2,3,3.1,3.11,4 second party software was locked out, with each new release. I had Wordstar, in the CPM days and the windoze release was as good. WordPerfect was also around and had a following from CPM days. When windoze 2 was released outside programs did not work. They had changed the published entry points for the main operating system. When looked at by software folks the entry points for windoze programs was different from published entry points. after three or four times. Word Star went bankrupt, Wordperfect, devolved down to shareware if I remember correctly and word for windows became the standard word processor. It was part of the package for the early windoze releases if I remember. Then they changed to Works as the included word processor, With Office being the full featured overpriced software.
Excell derives from Calc almost the same way.
The best replacement Free that I have run across is Open Office.
Microshaft may say one thing but they are always going to make more money if they can
|
|
|
| Re: If it ain't broke... [message #60377 is a reply to message #60357 ] |
Sat, 23 June 2012 15:23 |
|
Sir Lee
Messages: 3110
Registered: May 2005
Location: São Paulo, Brazil |
|
|
|
| Aranis wrote on Sat, 23 June 2012 12:28 | I'm curious, Sir Lee, what you might use for so-called "productivity tasks?" Google-Docs/Drive, perhaps?
|
I simply don't. I don't work in financials, so very little spreadsheeting (although, to be sure, spreadsheets are the only piece of software in office suites that I actually find useful). And I don't do presentations -- I don't do training, and my customers are small-to-midsize companies, where decisions are a matter of convincing one person, not a committee. Any writing I have to do for others is done by e-mail. Any documentation I have to do is in plaintext files or standard HTML, not locked in propretary crap, so if somebody needs to read it ten years down the road it will be sure to open.
My main "office" tools are a web browser, a mail client (I like Seamonkey for both tasks, but I can work with most anything) and a good plaintext editor with regexp support.
As you said, "so-called" productivity tasks... because reports and presentations don't actually PRODUCE anything. 90% of the time, it's just bureaucratic overhead.
[Updated on: Sat, 23 June 2012 15:27]
Don't call me Shirley. You will surely make me surly.
--
Sent from my Bugs Industries® bPhone™
|
|
|
| Re: If it ain't broke... [message #60505 is a reply to message #60285 ] |
Mon, 25 June 2012 19:27 |
 |
Rabiata
Messages: 528
Registered: July 2008
Location: Germany |
|
|
|
| mittfh wrote on Fri, 22 June 2012 02:57 | Mentioning nothing in particular...
Macro$loth Orifice...
|
Well yeah. I got a new PC @work half a year ago, with Office 2010 on it. By now I'm reasonably familiar with it. There are
-some actual improvements
-some change for the sake of change (read: why couldn't they just leave those features alone ?  )
-and a bunch of new annoyances  .
Overall, I don't like the new user interface better than the old one. At least the new version is less prone to crashing and random formatting changes, so switching from Word 2000 to 2010 was not completely useless.
|
|
| | |
Goto Forum:
Current Time: Thu Jun 20 06:33:24 EDT 2013
Total time taken to generate the page: 0.02596 seconds
|
Members
Search
Help
Register
Login
Home
). I vividly remember when Sun made an OS upgrade (SunOS to Slowlaris) that disabled EVERY SINGLE PROGRAM AND PRODUCT WE HAD. Including C programs written to run on top of the OS with no other software. And a lot of simple scripts. Apple is not nearly that bad, but still has caused problems. And there are worse examples than Sun.
