3 ms·

This is, in some senses, a sign that programming and computer systems are getting better. You don't want people to have to learn the difference between a brows

This is, in some senses, a sign that programming and computer systems are getting better. You don't want people to have to learn the difference between a browser and the web and a search engine and an operating system - you want things to just work. For most people once their machine is set up this is the case, and then when they want something different, they don't know what they're asking. This is a sign of success, and not a sign that the users are stupid. Although it must be admitted some of them are. So here's the question. If you run a service, how much do you insist your users learn before they can actually use it? Anything? Nothing? Added in edit: "What is a Browser" is a similar issue (linked to elsewhere from this thread, and from previous submissions: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=662105 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=662105 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=653962 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=653962 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=626482 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=626482 As I say - having people not knowing about these things is a measure of success.

toodlestech 16y ago
"You don't want people to have to learn the difference between a browser and the web and a search engine and an operating system - you want things to just work." But then such as in the linked question, you can't properly ask the right questions when your looking for an answer. What I took from the question is that they didn't want instant search which going to www.google.com doesn't get rid of. Having options and being able to change/customize can only happen if you know the basics of what you are messing around with. Not learning the difference between the web and a browser is being ignorant which in turn is what leads people to using outdated IE browsers and joyfully giving their personal information away to malware. [edit]I didn't see the date on the post at first so the instant search statement doesn't make sense but I feel it's still relevant.
kiba 16y ago
I think it's only make sense for average people who don't need to exploit computers to the nth degrees. But for people who require more power, the computer should shift to a system that let them easily learn and than manipulate that power, like emacs or like early computers that create whole generation of hackers. For most people, computers are an appliance, not a tool that you master over time. It is awesome that computers are progressing to that "easy" way, but it is not so awesome when other dimension of computers as tool slip away. It's like the computer becoming more easier for grandma while raising the barrier of entry for those who want to learn and create on the computer.
hugh3 16y ago
You don't want people to have to learn the difference between a browser and the web and a search engine and an operating system - you want things to just work. Except that things still aren't at the "just work" stage, and perhaps never will be. People who are ignorant of cars or washing machines can nowadays use their cars and washing machines for years without running into any weird situation they don't know how to fix. But people who are ignorant of computers seem to wind up having weird problems they don't understand quite regularly. I'd say that's not a design issue, that's just to do with the fact that a computer is a more complex tool, with a much wider range of possible inputs, than a car is.
dkarl 16y ago
Not knowing something, and not needing to know it, is progress. Not knowing something despite needing to know it is not progress. People will always need to know things. (Otherwise we could have instant "progress" by lobotomizing the users and leaving them drooling helplessly on their keyboards.) It's bad to decrease your users' savvy faster than you decrease their need for it.

toodlestech 16y ago

"You don't want people to have to learn the difference between a browser and the web and a search engine and an operating system - you want things to just work." But then such as in the linked question, you can't properly ask the right questions when your looking for an answer. What I took from the question is that they didn't want instant search which going to www.google.com doesn't get rid of. Having options and being able to change/customize can only happen if you know the basics of what you are messing around with. Not learning the difference between the web and a browser is being ignorant which in turn is what leads people to using outdated IE browsers and joyfully giving their personal information away to malware. [edit]I didn't see the date on the post at first so the instant search statement doesn't make sense but I feel it's still relevant.

kiba 16y ago

I think it's only make sense for average people who don't need to exploit computers to the nth degrees. But for people who require more power, the computer should shift to a system that let them easily learn and than manipulate that power, like emacs or like early computers that create whole generation of hackers. For most people, computers are an appliance, not a tool that you master over time. It is awesome that computers are progressing to that "easy" way, but it is not so awesome when other dimension of computers as tool slip away. It's like the computer becoming more easier for grandma while raising the barrier of entry for those who want to learn and create on the computer.

hugh3 16y ago

You don't want people to have to learn the difference between a browser and the web and a search engine and an operating system - you want things to just work. Except that things still aren't at the "just work" stage, and perhaps never will be. People who are ignorant of cars or washing machines can nowadays use their cars and washing machines for years without running into any weird situation they don't know how to fix. But people who are ignorant of computers seem to wind up having weird problems they don't understand quite regularly. I'd say that's not a design issue, that's just to do with the fact that a computer is a more complex tool, with a much wider range of possible inputs, than a car is.

dkarl 16y ago

Not knowing something, and not needing to know it, is progress. Not knowing something despite needing to know it is not progress. People will always need to know things. (Otherwise we could have instant "progress" by lobotomizing the users and leaving them drooling helplessly on their keyboards.) It's bad to decrease your users' savvy faster than you decrease their need for it.