4 ms·
Wow. In the US, coffee-makers are low-payed jobs with no benefits -- as opposed to omputing and IT, which are good jobs. So your first analogy doesn't apply.
by jdp23 16y ago
Wow.
In the US, coffee-makers are low-payed jobs with no benefits -- as opposed to omputing and IT, which are good jobs. So your first analogy doesn't apply.
And on the second point, the field of gender HCI has shown that there tend to be differences in how men and women use computer programs. Yes, these are contextual and more likely to be due to societal norms, social pressures, and encouragement with technology than any innate gender difference. Still, they're real. And when software is constructed by almost-all-male teams, those preferred usages get embedded in it.
- yummyfajitas 16y agoAnd when software is constructed by almost-all-male teams, those preferred usages get embedded in it. Yet somehow, men successfully make software used by women. For example, Facebook, Zynga, Polyvore (or Bingo Card Creator, if you want to ask an approachable man how he does it). Of course, if we follow your logic, it's actually a good thing if app developers at (for example) Bloomberg are mostly male. After all, trading desks are also mostly male, so it would be bad if female preferred usages were embedded into market research software, right? And it's also irrelevant for any part of IT where the HCI doesn't matter much (e.g. data analysis, systems, CRUD apps with a captive audience). At best, your second point applies only narrowly to UI designers.