<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Bashing and Praising Technology</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.keenerliving.com/bashing-and-praising-technology/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.keenerliving.com/bashing-and-praising-technology</link>
	<description>A retired professional talks about life, technology, learning</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 10 Feb 2012 22:32:00 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Bruce Keener</title>
		<link>http://www.keenerliving.com/bashing-and-praising-technology#comment-32946</link>
		<dc:creator>Bruce Keener</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 22 Apr 2009 23:07:40 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.keenerliving.com/?p=1610#comment-32946</guid>
		<description>Interesting observations, Rod. Good to hear from you again. Thank you for the comment!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Interesting observations, Rod. Good to hear from you again. Thank you for the comment!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Rod Jones</title>
		<link>http://www.keenerliving.com/bashing-and-praising-technology#comment-32937</link>
		<dc:creator>Rod Jones</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 22 Apr 2009 21:28:45 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.keenerliving.com/?p=1610#comment-32937</guid>
		<description>Hi Bruce,

I think there are two factors that make the perfect &#039;all-in-one-device&#039; just the dream of the marketing departments.

Firstly, human nature is so variable.  What is great today (a must have) for two people, is no longer great tomorrow for one of them.  People&#039;s perceptions change, and often for no logical reason.

Secondly, the mathematical probability of producing the perfect &#039;all-in-one&#039; device diminshes as the features increase. Lets assume that for each feature 95% of users are perfectly satisfied. So out of a total of 1000 users 950 are happy with any one single feature; 50, though, are not happy. Now if you add in a second feature to those 950 originally satisfied users (using again 95% satisfaction) then only 903 people will be completely satisfied with both features; another [additional] 47 people will not be completely satisfied though.  Now add a third feature to those identified 903 happy users (again at 95% satisfaction)  and the number of completly satisfied users now falls to 858.  And so the completly satisfied users diminish as the number of features increases ...

When you purchase a low spec item the choice is easy; if you like it you buy it.  As the number of features grows then your purchasing choice becomes more clouded; invariably you end up buying a product that meets your needs in most areas - but not all.  Only the lucky few will purchase a product that meets their needs completly - and then only until tomorrow comes and their perception changes!

In our consumer driven society the marketing departments of the large companies need to continually entice us, and so they add more features proclaiming that their latest gadget is the solution to all our problems. Reality though for most of us is different.

On a slightly different note ...  Last year I bought a new mobile phone; mine rings when someone calls me, and I can talk to them.  I understand it even has text messaging (a feature I don&#039;t want!).  I thought the salesman would have been disgruntled at selling such a low spec phone. I subsequently learnt that I paid a premium for this phone as the marketing departments have now cottoned on that some people don&#039;t want complexity but simplicity. It seems you just can&#039;t win.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hi Bruce,</p>
<p>I think there are two factors that make the perfect &#8216;all-in-one-device&#8217; just the dream of the marketing departments.</p>
<p>Firstly, human nature is so variable.  What is great today (a must have) for two people, is no longer great tomorrow for one of them.  People&#8217;s perceptions change, and often for no logical reason.</p>
<p>Secondly, the mathematical probability of producing the perfect &#8216;all-in-one&#8217; device diminshes as the features increase. Lets assume that for each feature 95% of users are perfectly satisfied. So out of a total of 1000 users 950 are happy with any one single feature; 50, though, are not happy. Now if you add in a second feature to those 950 originally satisfied users (using again 95% satisfaction) then only 903 people will be completely satisfied with both features; another [additional] 47 people will not be completely satisfied though.  Now add a third feature to those identified 903 happy users (again at 95% satisfaction)  and the number of completly satisfied users now falls to 858.  And so the completly satisfied users diminish as the number of features increases &#8230;</p>
<p>When you purchase a low spec item the choice is easy; if you like it you buy it.  As the number of features grows then your purchasing choice becomes more clouded; invariably you end up buying a product that meets your needs in most areas &#8211; but not all.  Only the lucky few will purchase a product that meets their needs completly &#8211; and then only until tomorrow comes and their perception changes!</p>
<p>In our consumer driven society the marketing departments of the large companies need to continually entice us, and so they add more features proclaiming that their latest gadget is the solution to all our problems. Reality though for most of us is different.</p>
<p>On a slightly different note &#8230;  Last year I bought a new mobile phone; mine rings when someone calls me, and I can talk to them.  I understand it even has text messaging (a feature I don&#8217;t want!).  I thought the salesman would have been disgruntled at selling such a low spec phone. I subsequently learnt that I paid a premium for this phone as the marketing departments have now cottoned on that some people don&#8217;t want complexity but simplicity. It seems you just can&#8217;t win.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

