Simplify Complexity

[MCWebsite.Staff]

** This thread discusses the article: Simplify Complexity **
** This thread discusses the Content article: Simplify Complexity **
0

[Guest.Visitor]

Simplify Complexity

** This thread discusses the article: Simplify Complexity **
My softwarte vendor is starting a process to totally rewrite our software in Java. I sent an email off to them just yesterday indicating that the interface has to AT LEAST be what I call "Amazon stupid". A user doesn't have to know about Amazon or pretty much anything about anything to order from Amazon. It's a simple and intuitive process. We have a wonderful set of software that our "right brained" users won't use because it's too hard. To my (mostly) left brain .. it's not hard at all. I am all for the big RED button. Keep our users happy and me employed!

[dmashl@perkins1.com]

Simplify Complexity

** This thread discusses the article: Simplify Complexity **
If you want to see technology run amok, send time watching people trying to use the ATM/Credit card gasoline pumps. We're so bright we can't even figure out how to get the gas cap on the same side of all cars. Just watch them dance... And for a real treat try to use a self-check out terminal! One local chain has the cash return on the lower right side of the unit while the screen is in the upper left with the receipt printer. Duh, where do I expect the cash to be returned? At my feet? Oh, better stop, I feel my BP going up!

[Anvil]

Simplify Complexity

** This thread discusses the article: Simplify Complexity **
One of my favorite TV shows is "Everybody Loves Raymond." There are many reasons for this, but the main one is that I can so closely identify with everything they experience. It is amazing. I don't think I have ever seen an episode that I couldn't identify with most of what they are acting out, in a light hearted way. Joel, you are the "Everybody loves Raymond" of information technology. Please, keep up the good work.

[J.Klebanoff]

Simplify Complexity

** This thread discusses the article: Simplify Complexity **
I tend to relate most to Woody Allen characters. And, this publication has taken to referring to me as "IT's answer to Andy Rooney", but I'll take "the Everybody loves Raymond of information technology." I'm not a regular viewer of the show, but I assume that's not an insult. Thanks (I think).

[J.Klebanoff]

Simplify Complexity

** This thread discusses the article: Simplify Complexity **
emkay said:

I sent an email off to them just yesterday indicating that the interface has to AT LEAST be what I call "Amazon stupid".

Keep up the good fight. All too often companies feel the need to take advantage of "great, new technologies" and apply them in ways that make things more complex, all in the name of progress. Keep it simple.

[J.Klebanoff]

Simplify Complexity

** This thread discusses the article: Simplify Complexity **
dmashl said:

We're so bright we can't even figure out how to get the gas cap on the same side of all cars.

That one really bugs me. I live downtown and work at home, so I drive ridiculously little and keep my cars for a lot of years, but the few times I've bought a new car, the gas is always on the opposite side from my last car. It usually takes me a year into my new car before I remember to go to the other side of the pump when I pull in to fill up ... And then there are rental cars ... grrrr I've never used a self-checkout terminal. Knowing how unintuitive these things tend to be, I suspect that the first few times I try to use one I'll be totally confounded.

[Guest.Visitor]

Simplify Complexity

** This thread discusses the article: Simplify Complexity **
A great tool, but IBM doesn't even document how to use it. Joe Pluta went to them, learned and wrote a 600 page book and it doesn't cover everything. They don't even have editor preferences in the same place. I love the tool, but it takes a magician to figure out how it works. IBM lets keep it simple too!

[J.Klebanoff]

Simplify Complexity

** This thread discusses the article: Simplify Complexity **
ghogancamp wrote:

Joe Pluta went to them, learned and wrote a 600 page book and it doesn't cover everything.

I suspect that anything which requires a 600 page book to describe less than 100% of the product, will never qualify as "simple", no matter how well Joe wrote his book. Then again, WebSphere Development Studio Client is not targeted at the consumer market. While it could, no doubt, be simpler than it is, some things need a little complexity to do what they do while still being sold at a price that companies can afford. That's why they pay you wizards the big bucks. I think that everything should be made as simple as possible considering the function that they have to perform, but particularly those products directed at the consumer market. Congratulations on becoming a magician.

[Guest.Visitor]

Simplify Complexity

** This thread discusses the article: Simplify Complexity **
I agree. In order to do all the product is supposed to do, it must be complex, and I think they have done an amazing job on the product. The biggest hassle I find is the fact that you find preferences available in several places. Some of the preferences are the same appear the no matter where you find the preference option. Others you have to click on the preferences in the tools menu others you have to click on the one hidden on the other side of the screen.

[Guest.Visitor]

Simplify Complexity

** This thread discusses the article: Simplify Complexity **
Y'know . . . isn't this what Apple has been saying for years? Keep it simple. While the Mac may still have it's share of complexities, one tends to wonder why more & more people are going over to that platform lately. Besides the popularity of the iPod, the Mac itself is so much easier to use & an added bonus is that you are not as subject to the attacks of virus authors who seem to be constantly feeding their digital vendetta against Bill Gates by attacking anything that is Windows/Microsoft. I just bought my son a Powerbook for college because I wanted him to, (a)not have to deal with computer viruses as much as the next guy & (b)I wanted him to have a computer that was pretty much a bullet-proof "Information Appliance" &, so far, this wonderful laptop has operated flawlessly for him! Besides that, it's fun to use & provides musical entertainment while being a powerful tool at the same time. I'm a long time PC user who just recently had my fill of Windows complexities & short comings, and bought a Mac. It has been a joy to use. I still program on IBM midrange iSeries computers & have been working with Microsoft tools like SQL Server lately on a Pentium4 running XP.

[Guest.Visitor]

Simplify Complexity

** This thread discusses the article: Simplify Complexity **
400fella said about Macs: "While the Mac may still have it's share of complexities, one tends to wonder why more & more people are going over to that platform lately." Mac market share is less than 2%. Macs are simpler. Just as a disposable camera is simpler than a Cannon G5 digital camera. There's a marketplace for both. 400fella said: "Besides the popularity of the iPod" Certainly the iPod has helped Mac sales, but that's simply temporary. The "coolness" factor of the iPod will cool off to a competitor that is cheaper and "cooler." I have purchase 3 iPods (I have 3 daughters) and know about its coolness. However, iTunes is NOT cool, but difficult to use, IMO. The iPod has ALL of the earmarks of a fad item. If the MP3 listenening device market is here to stay, which I believe it is, then MP3 players will become commodities just as DVD players currently are. DVD players are now $29 at Walmart. I believe we'll see 5 gig MP3 players under $100 soon. 400 fella said: "an added bonus is that you are not as subject to the attacks of virus authors who seem to be constantly feeding their digital vendetta against Bill Gates by attacking anything that is Windows/Microsoft." People always want to take pot shots at the leader. That's why the Mac will always be safe. chuck Opinions expressed are not necessarily those of my employer.

[Guest.Visitor]

Simplify Complexity

** This thread discusses the article: Simplify Complexity **
The big rumour this past week (later turned out to be true) was IBM selling its PC business. Less well publicized was the runour that IBM was in talks with Apple for some sort of cooperation deal. Makes sense in some ways. Think about it - what CPU is used in Apple computers these days? IBM gets out of the Intel PC business only to get into the PowerPC workstation business? OSX is based on BSD. Might this be one more way for IBM to bring Posix compatibility to its customers, and help wean them away from wintel? Hmmmm. q

[dmjae2004@yahoo.com]

Simplify Complexity

** This thread discusses the article: Simplify Complexity **
I've often wondered if I the only reason that I find telephones easy to use is that I've grown up with them. (No, I was not born before Alexander Graham Bell.) However, I think that it is more than mere familiarity. What could be simpler than picking up a handset and pressing a few buttons? Except I am told in the old days the telephone didnt need buttons to press. You just picked up the phone and asked an operator to connect you. You didnt even always have to know the number to call. While Antonio Meucci's invention has a lot of benefits it certainly falls short of the ideals. Now Electricity is a what I call simple!

[dmjae2004@yahoo.com]

Simplify Complexity

** This thread discusses the article: Simplify Complexity **
The iPod has ALL of the earmarks of a fad item Granted I believe the assesment is still subjective....but I dont see iPODs or MP3 players in general exibiting all 8 attributes. IMO I would see it having earmarks 5 & 6 only, but could see an argument for 7....but all 8 ??????? 1. Simple 2. Prescriptive 3. Falsely encouraging 4. One-Size-Fits-All 5. Easy to Cut-and-Paste 6. In tune with the Zeitgeist 7. Novel, not radical 8. Legitimized by Gurus and Disciples