If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Rate Thread | Display Modes |
#106
|
|||
|
|||
Consumers' privacy concerns not backed by their actions
In article
"Jimmy Wilkinson Knife" wrote: On Sat, 02 Jun 2018 18:18:45 +0100, Mike Easter wrote: Jimmy Wilkinson Knife wrote: Mike Easter wrote: Roger Blake wrote: Cost is ridiculous when compared to similar-spec commodity hardware, but as I said what you're paying for is the ease of use for people who really have no knowledge of computers at all. I find it frustrating to deal with since it is so locked down. However my elderly neighbor, who is a WWII veteran to whom a computer seems like something out of Buck Rogers, loves the thing. Another feature of the WOW which is an all-in-one design 22" touchscreen (2G ram, 32 G SSD, wireless kb/mouse) is their 'built-in' support situation. Free lifetime basic support and VIP support at $10/mo, which basic support is toll free phone, email, and claims to be US based (that may be the VIP v.) as opposed to a language barrier phone center somewhere in the world. The VIP support includes extras and remote access support. I dunno about the US, but in the UK if I get an Indian I just say "I'd like to speak to an English person please" and they put me through to one. The business of being able to provide sufficient quality telephone support is typically a very costly and difficult undertaking. The typical scenario is that it is farmed out to call centers somewhere the support hourly wage is more affordable, such as India or the Philippines. Which is why minimum wage is a stupid idea, it just means other countries get all our work. This target marketed audience of seniors, particularly those who would choose to buy such a WOW computer, would seem to me to be a particularly difficult one. "I don't know anything about computers and my faculties are somewhat impaired as I can't see very well (or hear very well, or remember very well, or handle a mouse very well)." It is interesting that the WOW people decided to build their interface on the Tiny Core Linux base and other open source ware. It seems that the hardware is very minimal except for what is spent on that 22" touchscreen, so the dollar distribution would be hardware-wise principally that monitor touchscreen and then the tech support. I'm sure they would 'immediately' upgrade the users who needed more support to the $10/mo VIP (1st 30 d. free VIP), but that is still pretty cheap price. Being able to give remote support helps a lot, but that requires functional connectivity and hardware performance. If one of those weren't operating properly, I think the customer would need some kind of outside support. I was once asked to fax a copy of a receipt to a company when the fax/modem I bought from them wasn't working. He realised his mistake when I burst out laughing. The reviews on Amazon were more negative than positive. You managed to find Amazon's review system? I hate Amazon, it's about 10 times harder to use than Ebay. First annoying thing, the postage ain't shown in the search results. So I can't see who's the cheapest. Amazon, you lose. There were worthwhile comments there from IT people who made suggestions about alternate ways to provide much better hardware, but I didn't find those suggestions satisfactory about how to achieve a 'foolproof' interface. There's the nut in this venture. -- Can fat people go skinny-dipping? |
Ads |
#107
|
|||
|
|||
Consumers' privacy concerns not backed by their actions
On Sat, 02 Jun 2018 22:30:43 +0100, Anonymous wrote:
In article "Jimmy Wilkinson Knife" wrote: On Sat, 02 Jun 2018 18:18:45 +0100, Mike Easter wrote: Jimmy Wilkinson Knife wrote: Mike Easter wrote: Roger Blake wrote: Cost is ridiculous when compared to similar-spec commodity hardware, but as I said what you're paying for is the ease of use for people who really have no knowledge of computers at all. I find it frustrating to deal with since it is so locked down. However my elderly neighbor, who is a WWII veteran to whom a computer seems like something out of Buck Rogers, loves the thing. Another feature of the WOW which is an all-in-one design 22" touchscreen (2G ram, 32 G SSD, wireless kb/mouse) is their 'built-in' support situation. Free lifetime basic support and VIP support at $10/mo, which basic support is toll free phone, email, and claims to be US based (that may be the VIP v.) as opposed to a language barrier phone center somewhere in the world. The VIP support includes extras and remote access support. I dunno about the US, but in the UK if I get an Indian I just say "I'd like to speak to an English person please" and they put me through to one. The business of being able to provide sufficient quality telephone support is typically a very costly and difficult undertaking. The typical scenario is that it is farmed out to call centers somewhere the support hourly wage is more affordable, such as India or the Philippines. Which is why minimum wage is a stupid idea, it just means other countries get all our work. This target marketed audience of seniors, particularly those who would choose to buy such a WOW computer, would seem to me to be a particularly difficult one. "I don't know anything about computers and my faculties are somewhat impaired as I can't see very well (or hear very well, or remember very well, or handle a mouse very well)." It is interesting that the WOW people decided to build their interface on the Tiny Core Linux base and other open source ware. It seems that the hardware is very minimal except for what is spent on that 22" touchscreen, so the dollar distribution would be hardware-wise principally that monitor touchscreen and then the tech support. I'm sure they would 'immediately' upgrade the users who needed more support to the $10/mo VIP (1st 30 d. free VIP), but that is still pretty cheap price. Being able to give remote support helps a lot, but that requires functional connectivity and hardware performance. If one of those weren't operating properly, I think the customer would need some kind of outside support. I was once asked to fax a copy of a receipt to a company when the fax/modem I bought from them wasn't working. He realised his mistake when I burst out laughing. The reviews on Amazon were more negative than positive. You managed to find Amazon's review system? I hate Amazon, it's about 10 times harder to use than Ebay. First annoying thing, the postage ain't shown in the search results. So I can't see who's the cheapest. Amazon, you lose. There were worthwhile comments there from IT people who made suggestions about alternate ways to provide much better hardware, but I didn't find those suggestions satisfactory about how to achieve a 'foolproof' interface. There's the nut in this venture. -- Can fat people go skinny-dipping? -- I've never had a problem with drugs, I've had problems with the police. - Keith Richards |
#108
|
|||
|
|||
Off-Topic in the privacy group
In article
Mike Easter wrote: Mike Easter wrote: I wonder exactly who is in charge of developing the interface, since it seems to be being used by more than one outfit. I believe Venture 3's Fred Allegrezza has been into this idea longer than WOW. Here's Fred commenting in the Ub forum in 2012 Oct; Hey Guys, Telikin was developed on the TinyCore Linux. Our primary goal of using Linux was to avoid viruses, spyware, and malware. We also chose TinyCore to have an option of an embedded version in the future. I am not a Linux expert. Tim, Megan, Adam, Cliff and Carl work on the OS and back office systems. We also have an application team developing the apps on Java. We also selected TinyCore to have a platform that was easy for us to manage updates for the users. Our background was in cable where settop boxes have a lot of software but it is managed for the end users. We agree that there are many tech savvy seniors. We built the computer for those that are not comfortable with computers. About 50% of our users have never used a copmputer before. We were not targeting tech savvy seniors. They have Windows and Mac as options. We decided to include a number of applications so the end users would not need to load and manage application. In addition we know the apps and if when a customer calls in we know what they are using. I think of this more as an application system. A big part of the business is support. We built in a remote management service for all computers so we can remotly show our users how to use applications. The specs are on the web site. As a value proposition telikin serves a niche market, included software applications and great support. We undertand it is not for everyone, but there are a number of happy users. Hope this helps. Fred Allegrezza CEO Telikin. -- Mike Easter |
#109
|
|||
|
|||
Consumers' privacy concerns not backed by their actions
On 2018-06-02, Mike Easter wrote:
Here's Fred commenting in the Ub forum in 2012 Oct; ... Interesting. It's a niche segment of the market I'm really not familiar with since in general I don't work on home computers. (Though of course I do get roped into doing so for people I know.) If it weren't for my neighbor asking me to hook up a printer for him I would probably not even know about those systems. I do understand that a big chunk of the high price is for support. I found the Wow computer support pretty good when I called to find out what kind of printer could be used. I got through to a real person quickly whose primary Language was English. As soon as he realized that I grokked Linux he told me "any printer that works with HPLIP version x.x (whatever it was)." -- ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- Roger Blake (Posts from Google Groups killfiled due to excess spam.) NSA sedition and treason -- http://www.DeathToNSAthugs.com Don't talk to cops! -- http://www.DontTalkToCops.com Badges don't grant extra rights -- http://www.CopBlock.org ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- |
#110
|
|||
|
|||
Consumers' privacy concerns not backed by their actions
On 2018-06-02, Mike Easter wrote:
16 G in a rig like this would be ridiculous. It would be better to spend some money on a faster CPU. I have no idea how they are handling the graphics. Since it's Celeron-based, probably low-end Intel graphics. (Most Intel graphics are well supported in Linux.) Overall performance seemed to be OK for its intended purpose. For that matter I have a couple of old Celeron-based netbooks with 2GB memory and those run OK for light use with Lubuntu. They probably would run even better with something really lightweight like Tiny Core. -- ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- Roger Blake (Posts from Google Groups killfiled due to excess spam.) NSA sedition and treason -- http://www.DeathToNSAthugs.com Don't talk to cops! -- http://www.DontTalkToCops.com Badges don't grant extra rights -- http://www.CopBlock.org ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- |
#111
|
|||
|
|||
Consumers' privacy concerns not backed by their actions
In article , oOze
wrote: Similarly, on the Mac, a user would probably not have any idea what the heck permissions are and why they would need to be fixed. not true. permissions don't need to be fixed which is why that can no longer be done. Are you sure about that? yes. it was a placebo, often recommended to fix just about any problem, except that it rarely, if ever, fixed anything. it was a waste of time. permissions don't 'break' and do not need to be 'repaired'. it should be called 'reset permissions', because all it did was reset them to what the system thinks they should be, which isn't necessarily the only valid option. long ago, macs could dual boot both os x and the old classic mac os, the latter of which was not unix-based and had no concept of unix file permissions. sometimes, while booted in classic mac os, permissions for os x related files could be inadvertently altered, usually by an app installer, so back then, repair permissions *did* fix things. except that classic mac os has been dead for more than 15 years and that scenario is no longer possible, yet for some reason, repair permissions lives on and has become a magical snake oil cure-all no matter what problem it might be. the last few mac os versions have additional security measures that make it impossible for system files to be mistakenly altered, so repair permissions was removed, first from the gui while leaving the command line version, then later removed entirely. It seemed to still be around the last time my mom had a problem with her Mac. it may have been around, but it almost certainly did not fix whatever problem she had. It might have changed though, I don't really know since I don't use Macs anymore. now you do. |
#112
|
|||
|
|||
Consumers' privacy concerns not backed by their actions
Snit wrote:
On 6/2/18 1:31 PM, nospam wrote: In article , Snit wrote: I'll stick to the one 90% of the population uses. More programs available yep (no I won't say "apps", those are for phones), app is short for application, a term that dates back at least to the 80s, probably even earlier Right. It is the term Apple has used since AT LEAST the start of the Mac. Who cares!? We're talking about the *real* world! (Just kidding!) FWIW, I only first encountered the term for mobile devices, yes Apples'. OTOH, 'applet' was known (to me) well before that time. You only encountered it with mobile devices so you think that means the term was not used... and more than that want to restrict how others use the term! Why? https://blog.oxforddictionaries.com/2011/10/14/the-rise-of-the-app/ But, unlike smartphones and tablets, app isnıt new. According to the OED?s historical entry for the word, app as a shortening of application (as in application program) first found its way into print in the 1980s. Back then it was mainly a colloquial term used in computing circles: the OED?s early quotations for it come from such computing trade publications as Info World and Dr. Dobbıs Journal. It often appeared not by itself but as part of the phrase killer app, meaning a software application which makes a new computing platform desirable or necessary. Later, it became part of webapp, meaning an application made available as a website, but as a word used on its own it remained relatively uncommon. Good to see you found where "application" has been in use for quite some time in this context. Heck, if you go to 1984 with the Macintosh it was the primary term used. Since then it has been often shortened to just "app", much as "Macintosh" itself has been shortened to "Mac". Huh? The discussion was not about the term 'application', but about the term 'app'. IME, the term 'application' has been in use at least as long as I'm in the_industry/computing, some 50 years. |
#113
|
|||
|
|||
Consumers' privacy concerns not backed by their actions
nospam wrote:
In article , Frank Slootweg wrote: FWIW, I've been working in the computer industry since the late 60s and I did not encounter the term 'app' before mobile devices. I think it was probably mostly an Apple-thing. nospam says that it's not (an Apple-thing), but as usual he doesn't back up his claims. as usual, i did. Yeah, I saw your reference after my post. Too small a time difference, 20 minutes. here it is again: https://blog.oxforddictionaries.com/2011/10/14/the-rise-of-the-app/ But, unlike smartphones and tablets, app isnıt new. According to the OED?s historical entry for the word, app as a shortening of application (as in application program) first found its way into print in the 1980s. Back then it was mainly a colloquial term used in computing circles: the OED?s early quotations for it come from such computing trade publications as Info World and Dr. Dobbıs Journal. It often appeared not by itself but as part of the phrase killer app, meaning a software application which makes a new computing platform desirable or necessary. Later, it became part of webapp, meaning an application made available as a website, but as a word used on its own it remained relatively uncommon. Your reference confirms that the use of 'app' by itself was uncommon. Anyway, I was only describing *my* experience with the term ('app'), but apparently some people have problems parsing 'I', 'me', etc.. EOD. |
#114
|
|||
|
|||
Consumers' privacy concerns not backed by their actions
In article , Frank Slootweg
wrote: https://blog.oxforddictionaries.com/2011/10/14/the-rise-of-the-app/ But, unlike smartphones and tablets, app isnıt new. According to the OED?s historical entry for the word, app as a shortening of application (as in application program) first found its way into print in the 1980s. Back then it was mainly a colloquial term used in computing circles: the OED?s early quotations for it come from such computing trade publications as Info World and Dr. Dobbıs Journal. It often appeared not by itself but as part of the phrase killer app, meaning a software application which makes a new computing platform desirable or necessary. Later, it became part of webapp, meaning an application made available as a website, but as a word used on its own it remained relatively uncommon. Good to see you found where "application" has been in use for quite some time in this context. Heck, if you go to 1984 with the Macintosh it was the primary term used. Since then it has been often shortened to just "app", much as "Macintosh" itself has been shortened to "Mac". Huh? The discussion was not about the term 'application', but about the term 'app'. IME, the term 'application' has been in use at least as long as I'm in the_industry/computing, some 50 years. app is short for application. |
#115
|
|||
|
|||
Consumers' privacy concerns not backed by their actions
In article , Frank Slootweg
wrote: FWIW, I've been working in the computer industry since the late 60s and I did not encounter the term 'app' before mobile devices. I think it was probably mostly an Apple-thing. nospam says that it's not (an Apple-thing), but as usual he doesn't back up his claims. as usual, i did. Yeah, I saw your reference after my post. Too small a time difference, 20 minutes. here it is again: https://blog.oxforddictionaries.com/2011/10/14/the-rise-of-the-app/ But, unlike smartphones and tablets, app isnıt new. According to the OED?s historical entry for the word, app as a shortening of application (as in application program) first found its way into print in the 1980s. Back then it was mainly a colloquial term used in computing circles: the OED?s early quotations for it come from such computing trade publications as Info World and Dr. Dobbıs Journal. It often appeared not by itself but as part of the phrase killer app, meaning a software application which makes a new computing platform desirable or necessary. Later, it became part of webapp, meaning an application made available as a website, but as a word used on its own it remained relatively uncommon. Your reference confirms that the use of 'app' by itself was uncommon. common or not, the use of the term began well before smartphones. Anyway, I was only describing *my* experience with the term ('app'), but apparently some people have problems parsing 'I', 'me', etc.. ok. |
#116
|
|||
|
|||
Consumers' privacy concerns not backed by their actions
nospam wrote:
In article , Frank Slootweg wrote: https://blog.oxforddictionaries.com/2011/10/14/the-rise-of-the-app/ But, unlike smartphones and tablets, app isnıt new. According to the OED?s historical entry for the word, app as a shortening of application (as in application program) first found its way into print in the 1980s. Back then it was mainly a colloquial term used in computing circles: the OED?s early quotations for it come from such computing trade publications as Info World and Dr. Dobbıs Journal. It often appeared not by itself but as part of the phrase killer app, meaning a software application which makes a new computing platform desirable or necessary. Later, it became part of webapp, meaning an application made available as a website, but as a word used on its own it remained relatively uncommon. Good to see you found where "application" has been in use for quite some time in this context. Heck, if you go to 1984 with the Macintosh it was the primary term used. Since then it has been often shortened to just "app", much as "Macintosh" itself has been shortened to "Mac". Huh? The discussion was not about the term 'application', but about the term 'app'. IME, the term 'application' has been in use at least as long as I'm in the_industry/computing, some 50 years. app is short for application. Duh! The *point* is that we (Jimmy Wilkinson Knife and I) say that use of the term 'app' came with the advent of mobile devices, while (I say) the term 'application' was in use at least some four decades earlier. |
#117
|
|||
|
|||
Consumers' privacy concerns not backed by their actions
In article
Frank Slootweg wrote: Snit wrote: On 6/2/18 1:31 PM, nospam wrote: In article , Snit wrote: I'll stick to the one 90% of the population uses. More programs available yep (no I won't say "apps", those are for phones), app is short for application, a term that dates back at least to the 80s, probably even earlier Right. It is the term Apple has used since AT LEAST the start of the Mac. Who cares!? We're talking about the *real* world! (Just kidding!) FWIW, I only first encountered the term for mobile devices, yes Apples'. OTOH, 'applet' was known (to me) well before that time. You only encountered it with mobile devices so you think that means the term was not used... and more than that want to restrict how others use the term! Why? https://blog.oxforddictionaries.com/2011/10/14/the-rise-of-the-app/ But, unlike smartphones and tablets, app isnıt new. According to the OED?s historical entry for the word, app as a shortening of application (as in application program) first found its way into print in the 1980s. Back then it was mainly a colloquial term used in computing circles: the OED?s early quotations for it come from such computing trade publications as Info World and Dr. Dobbıs Journal. It often appeared not by itself but as part of the phrase killer app, meaning a software application which makes a new computing platform desirable or necessary. Later, it became part of webapp, meaning an application made available as a website, but as a word used on its own it remained relatively uncommon. Good to see you found where "application" has been in use for quite some time in this context. Heck, if you go to 1984 with the Macintosh it was the primary term used. Since then it has been often shortened to just "app", much as "Macintosh" itself has been shortened to "Mac". Huh? The discussion was not about the term 'application', but about the term 'app'. IME, the term 'application' has been in use at least as long as I'm in the_industry/computing, some 50 years. |
#118
|
|||
|
|||
Consumers' privacy concerns not backed by their actions
On Sun, 03 Jun 2018 04:29:09 +0100, Roger Blake wrote:
On 2018-06-02, Mike Easter wrote: 16 G in a rig like this would be ridiculous. It would be better to spend some money on a faster CPU. I have no idea how they are handling the graphics. Since it's Celeron-based, probably low-end Intel graphics. (Most Intel graphics are well supported in Linux.) Overall performance seemed to be OK for its intended purpose. For that matter I have a couple of old Celeron-based netbooks with 2GB memory and those run OK for light use with Lubuntu. They probably would run even better with something really lightweight like Tiny Core. Intel graphics is pretty horrid, but it seems to be catching up with discrete graphics cards which have pretty much stayed still for the last few years. I have a 4 year old Radeon R9 290. It cost me £290 back then. If I paid £330 now I'd get a Radeon RX580, which is only 19% faster for single precision and 40% SLOWER for double precision. They're going backwards! It does use less electricity, so saves you a small amount of money on that and also needs less cooling so is quieter, but I'd expect some more speed for 4 years development work. -- Kakistocracy - Government by the least qualified or most unprincipled citizens. http://www.thefreedictionary.com/kakistocracy |
#119
|
|||
|
|||
Consumers' privacy concerns not backed by their actions
On 6/3/18 7:59 AM, Frank Slootweg wrote:
Snit wrote: On 6/2/18 1:31 PM, nospam wrote: In article , Snit wrote: I'll stick to the one 90% of the population uses. More programs available yep (no I won't say "apps", those are for phones), app is short for application, a term that dates back at least to the 80s, probably even earlier Right. It is the term Apple has used since AT LEAST the start of the Mac. Who cares!? We're talking about the *real* world! (Just kidding!) FWIW, I only first encountered the term for mobile devices, yes Apples'. OTOH, 'applet' was known (to me) well before that time. You only encountered it with mobile devices so you think that means the term was not used... and more than that want to restrict how others use the term! Why? https://blog.oxforddictionaries.com/2011/10/14/the-rise-of-the-app/ But, unlike smartphones and tablets, app isnÂıt new. According to the OED?s historical entry for the word, app as a shortening of application (as in application program) first found its way into print in the 1980s. Back then it was mainly a colloquial term used in computing circles: the OED?s early quotations for it come from such computing trade publications as Info World and Dr. DobbÂıs Journal. It often appeared not by itself but as part of the phrase killer app, meaning a software application which makes a new computing platform desirable or necessary. Later, it became part of webapp, meaning an application made available as a website, but as a word used on its own it remained relatively uncommon. Good to see you found where "application" has been in use for quite some time in this context. Heck, if you go to 1984 with the Macintosh it was the primary term used. Since then it has been often shortened to just "app", much as "Macintosh" itself has been shortened to "Mac". Huh? The discussion was not about the term 'application', but about the term 'app'. IME, the term 'application' has been in use at least as "App" as an abbreviation for "application" goes back to at least 1981. https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/app ----- First Known Use of APP 1981 ----- The word itself, with any meaning, has been around a LOT longer, tjough in recent years spiking in 1991 and 2003: https://www.collinsdictionary.com/dictionary/english/app (See the "Trends of 'app'" section. " -- Personal attacks from those who troll show their own insecurity. They cannot use reason to show the message to be wrong so they try to feel somehow superior by attacking the messenger. They cling to their attacks and ignore the message time and time again. https://youtu.be/H4NW-Cqh308 |
#120
|
|||
|
|||
Consumers' privacy concerns not backed by their actions
In article , Snit
wrote: Huh? The discussion was not about the term 'application', but about the term 'app'. IME, the term 'application' has been in use at least as "App" as an abbreviation for "application" goes back to at least 1981. https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/app ----- First Known Use of APP 1981 ----- The word itself, with any meaning, has been around a LOT longer, tjough in recent years spiking in 1991 and 2003: https://www.collinsdictionary.com/dictionary/english/app (See the "Trends of 'app'" section. " in other words, well before smartphones became popular. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | Rate This Thread |
|
|