There is a popular myth that people prefer “better” (hip) tech. You know, all those studies about milliseconds of lag and amount of finished deals. Even it is t

There is a popular myth that people prefer “better” (hip) tech. You know, all those studies about milliseconds of lag and amount of finished deals. Even it is true, it's true for e-commerce. Commerce is not everything, and market is not a model for everything. People can be OK with pretty old tools if they are the means, not the ends. I'm also a bit triggered by author's mention of “necessary” e-mails and pushes. People who have something to say, and need to say it, go to any length to do it. I guess it's a property of commercial “communities” as something companies want to have. The root of the problem is that people need to be taught in advance that they can do more than chirping and gasping. It's not the forum engine that is different, it's the approach to posting, organizing the thoughts (even simple ones). The business won't educate people: the perfect consumer knows as little as possible, and relies on others' decisions. The social networks are based on an endless stream of impressions that get forgotten the moment they leave the scrolling buffer; it's like watching the sewer line. The chat-based communication tools are the same: everything just goes by the drain. That's the trade-off for the ease of expressing yourself. Finding relevant discussions in mailing lists or forum posts can be a pain, but it's way more hopeless with chats. Who does educate people how to use the World Wide Web, and the Internet?