Crank Up TOTO
Any and all emails to john(at)webword(dot)com are going into a black hole right now. The resolution is probably 1-2 days off. In effect, I’m email blind.
I have other email accounts - plenty - but that doesn’t mean much since john(at)webword(dot)com is my primary account. It is my Inbox and Outbox, if you catch my drift.
Think about how much you depend on email. While you probably moan and complain about spam, and the fact that the volume of email is outrageous these days, you still probably love it. It is a naughty child, the bad seed of the family.
I’m so tired of technology getting in the way. Why can’t technology be enabled and then just go away? Don’t answer that question. It is too stupid to merit an answer. But wouldn’t that be nice? Turn it on, tune it out, and just use it. Forget about configuration, debugging, troubleshooting, repairs, and uptime - just work, please.
Some technology is more Turn On, Tune Out (TOTO) than other technology. For example on the high end of the TOTO scale we have telephones (landline, not cell) and TVs, in the middle we have staplers and motor vehicles, and at the low end we have Windows. Some technology just works, some technology is fragile.
TOTO isn’t defined along a normal satisfaction curve. When technology works you don’t appreciate it enough, when it breaks you’re especially mad. The proportion of your anger or satifaction don’t always match your experience. At the heart, this is a matter of expectations violation.
Once you turn something on and it works, and it continues to work, your satisfaction for it working drops. You think - rightly - it should just work. When something breaks, it pops the stack. Your stack. It is a double whammy since expectations are violated and you’re probably being inconvenienced (e.g., can’t complete that call) or literally harmed in some way (e.g., your brakes fail, you crash).
Why does technological advancement almost always amount to adding features versus improving usability and stability? You can throw the marketing answer at me, that features sell. That’s pretty fair most of the time. But I’m not satisfied that is always the right answer.
I think the true root of the issue is that it is really hard to make something complex less complex whereas it is pretty easy to make something simple more complex. The flow isn’t symetrical. Another way to say this is, usability is tough. Simplicity is tough.
I love the irony. It almost makes me giggle.
August 2nd, 2005 at 7:36 pm
If you are reading this, consider it a minor victory! I’ve been doing battle with technology for over a month and it has been painful.
In any event, I am glad you are here.
August 3rd, 2005 at 7:23 am
Well … good to see something back JSR. Welcome back … L’chaim!
August 5th, 2005 at 1:04 pm
I feel your pain. The market has to provide the answer, especially the little guys. I agree that things are too complicated, but there is very little room to vote with your wallet since products have become so homogenized.
But sometimes overcomplexity can force simplicity and standardization, like how the DoD buying too many brands of computers led to the creation of the TCP/IP standard, which while not simple, can appear simple to the user.