4 ms·

Well there are millions such people in India and they are a big market.

roel_v 15y ago
No they're not, because they're the people who don't have a cent to spend, and if they do they'll spend it on food. There are millions who do have some money, but those already know how phones, computers etc. work.
- andos 15y ago
  People are not upright beasts whose only needs are food and shelter. People also might be perfectly well fed and healthy, but live in rural areas, or be elderly, or have learning disabilities. People who were once very poor can start receiving extra income (and that is particularly true in the BRIC countries) and gain access to computers. People interact with new interfaces all the time, and not all user interaction occurs with a computer. So, there definitely is a market for those complete novices. Regardless, understanding how people interact with new interfaces for the first time is interesting. Joe's case is only a single instance of this situation (and perhaps extreme, given the context). Every time a new interaction model is developed, the insights from such an experiment might prove useful.
- digamber_kamat 15y ago
  Your argument is logical but you see you are wrong. There is something about human beings that makes them act un-rationally. Many Indians who live on less that $2 a day own mobile phones. Coca Cola and Pepsi realized that they need to trap this market hence they decided to come up with very small bottles that cost around half of a normal drink bottle and this strategy got them millions. Similarly for stuff like Shampoo, ice cream and so on. Same thing can be applied to electronic items as well.
  - doyoulikeworms 15y ago
    This is not necessarily irrational, but a different expression of relative preference compared to the "most sensible" case. The reason I say this is because you cannot define a "rational" set of relative preferences. It is hard to say whether or not someone insanely frugal like Sam Walton is acting rationally or not, for example. Irrational behavior, in this context, could be that someone does value food over phones, but somehow ends up constantly buying phones to his misfortune. Not the same as someone who actually values phones over food.

No they're not, because they're the people who don't have a cent to spend, and if they do they'll spend it on food. There are millions who do have some money, but those already know how phones, computers etc. work.

andos 15y ago
People are not upright beasts whose only needs are food and shelter. People also might be perfectly well fed and healthy, but live in rural areas, or be elderly, or have learning disabilities. People who were once very poor can start receiving extra income (and that is particularly true in the BRIC countries) and gain access to computers. People interact with new interfaces all the time, and not all user interaction occurs with a computer. So, there definitely is a market for those complete novices. Regardless, understanding how people interact with new interfaces for the first time is interesting. Joe's case is only a single instance of this situation (and perhaps extreme, given the context). Every time a new interaction model is developed, the insights from such an experiment might prove useful.
digamber_kamat 15y ago
Your argument is logical but you see you are wrong. There is something about human beings that makes them act un-rationally. Many Indians who live on less that $2 a day own mobile phones. Coca Cola and Pepsi realized that they need to trap this market hence they decided to come up with very small bottles that cost around half of a normal drink bottle and this strategy got them millions. Similarly for stuff like Shampoo, ice cream and so on. Same thing can be applied to electronic items as well.
- doyoulikeworms 15y ago
  This is not necessarily irrational, but a different expression of relative preference compared to the "most sensible" case. The reason I say this is because you cannot define a "rational" set of relative preferences. It is hard to say whether or not someone insanely frugal like Sam Walton is acting rationally or not, for example. Irrational behavior, in this context, could be that someone does value food over phones, but somehow ends up constantly buying phones to his misfortune. Not the same as someone who actually values phones over food.