Best Win 8 Start Button replacement program?

On Sat, 01 Jun 2013 17:39:31 +0100, Good Guy
wrote:

On 07/05/2013 15:20, usenetopian wrote:
This has been asked before but I forget the answers given (sorry)

can anyone recommend a great Start button replacement for Windows 8?

Thanks in advance

May be you won't need it when Windows 8.1 comes out later this month:


Two points:

1. Windows 8.1 doesn't come out later this month. It won't be out
until late this year. What comes out on June 26 is only a preview of
it.

2. The Start button on Windows 8.1 is completely different from the
start button that we are accustomed to. All it will do is switch to
the modern interface. See, for example
http://msmvps.com/blogs/harrywaldron...-features.aspx
or http://tinyurl.com/kka7ke5

If you want the old start button back, you still need a third-party
program, such as Start8, my personal favorite.


--
Ken Blake

Good Guy wrote:
On 07/05/2013 15:20, usenetopian wrote:
This has been asked before but I forget the answers given (sorry)

can anyone recommend a great Start button replacement for Windows 8?

Thanks in advance

May be you won't need it when Windows 8.1 comes out later this month:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-22714048

At this point, I would suggest waiting until the 8.1 preview download
is available, then commenting.

My suspicion is, you'll be disappointed. One of the MS execs says
they're "being principled not stubborn", which means they're being
stubborn, and you'll still need your $5 third-party upgrade.
As third-party developers, know what their customers want, whereas
Microsoft, does not. And the marketing person at Microsoft,
had to come up with that "principled not stubborn" thing, as
a pre-warning about how happy you'll be. A marketing person, does
not hedge their terminology, when they're holding a "winning hand"
at the poker table.

Paul

But there should be a better and easier way for the consumer and general
public to provide that feedback so new products that are developed have
a better chance at succeeding.

There are plenty ways to collect data, but the two most important parts
are to design the "right" questions and "correctly interpret" the data.

When I was a young marketing manager, I used to play what we called
"mystery customer" game by walking into stores observing how sales and
customers interacted and how customer select and use products. I also
pretended to be an ordinary customer and asked all kinds of dumb
questions just to see how sales would treat a customer like me. This has
become a personal hobby.

I suspect that some are better than others at doing this.

Just a personal opinion, but I don't think MS knows much about it's
personal users. Large corporations and governments, yes.

Actually, MS should have collected enough "personal usage data" with its
embedded phone-home "feature" and other marketing mechanisms.

Regardless of if MS know enough personal users, but MS definitely know
that "business sector" and "consumer sector" have different purchasing
decision criterion.

A simple example, most business purchasing would consider "return on
investment" whilst a consumer purchase decision can be purely impulsive
and sensational one. MS should have divided the client Windows OS into
two broad sectors - one for consumer and one for business.

For the business version, their focus should be on interacting with the
back-end server systems, application servers, messaging servers, and
application compatibility, networking, stability, and so on. In other
words, they should use a more conservative approach for business products.

They could try whatever they want to try for the consumer version
without jeopardizing their business customers' operation.

I have no doubt that MS know this because it's really very basic.

The only reason that I could think of for them not to do is - they are
lazy and arrogant and thought they could push everybody to what they
want to.

Are you speaking of the ability to create something tangible out of
almost thin air?

In a way, it is.

Before any actual product can be produced (e.g. a fork), it has to go
through a lengthy design and design verification process before putting
into the final manufacturing process.

We already have all kinds of modeling and CAD/CAM software, or generally
called, computer aided design, but these are diagrams and you cannot get
the actual "look and feel" experience of the to-be manufactured product.
To get the actual "look and feel" experience, you need to put it to
"prototyping".

Obviously, all these processes take time and $$. With 3-D printing
technology, you put your ideas in like you want a traditional printer to
print it out on a paper (which is why it's called "printing") except
this would turn to a 3-D model or a primitive prototype for what we call
- concept verification.

You could immediately get a "look and feel" experience of your "idea"
and then go over the process for modifications until you have a
satisfactory result, then you could move to more serious prototyping
(verifying features, functions, and so on) and manufacturing and so on.

Right now, 3-D printing technology is not very mature(at least for many
products), but I hope someday it can help all kinds of product providers
to cut down the entire design process so they could quickly turn ideas
to a manufacturable model.

If you can further cut down the design-to-manufacture cycle time, it
means that you are always ahead of your competitors, which also means
that you could avoid price competition by constantly come out new
products faster than they can react.

Which brings up the core question, if the change doesn't benefit the
individual using it, of what value is it?

I don't understand the question. My point is that people have no
problems for adopting new technologies and products if they can
"experience" the benefits.

In the case of automobiles, it was an instant mass adoption except Henry
Ford insisted people only needed Model-T (like one Windows version?) but
GM created different brands to address the needs.

Consumer and business are two distinctive different sectors. You cannot
expect people buy a mission-critical system as they buy lingerie for
their lovers.

Anyone expects these two decisions are based on the same decision
criterion are either ignorant or arrogant or both.

But MS indeed expect consumer and business use the same decision
criterion for buying the latest and greatest Windows.

On 6/2/13 8:04 AM, xfile wrote:
But there should be a better and easier way for the consumer and general
public to provide that feedback so new products that are developed have
a better chance at succeeding.

There are plenty ways to collect data, but the two most important parts
are to design the "right" questions and "correctly interpret" the data.

Inherent in your statement is the assumption the vendor is devising ways
of collecting data. That's not what I mean.

I mean a way for the end user to voluntarily offer unbiased, unvarnished
opinions. Even if the opinion is "It's crap!" LOL

I've yet to take a poll or survey of any kind that allowed me to tell
the data collector exactly what I thought of X. And many are worded so
negatives are easily weeded out.

When I was a young marketing manager, I used to play what we called
"mystery customer" game by walking into stores observing how sales and
customers interacted and how customer select and use products. I also
pretended to be an ordinary customer and asked all kinds of dumb
questions just to see how sales would treat a customer like me. This has
become a personal hobby.

Every so often I get a spam mail wanting me to be a "mystery shopper".
grin

I suspect that some are better than others at doing this.

Just a personal opinion, but I don't think MS knows much about it's
personal users. Large corporations and governments, yes.

Actually, MS should have collected enough "personal usage data" with its
embedded phone-home "feature" and other marketing mechanisms.

But can that "personal usage data" differentiate *how* the user is using
the product. Is Word being used to write legal briefs, or as a page
layout program? Is Excel being used to crunch numbers for a science
project, a financial prediction of some type, or as a database?

Those things require different features, how would the personal usage
data know what the user is ultimately doing? The only way I can think
of is for the phone home feature to report on the actual info generated
by the user, which everyone says they don't do.

Regardless of if MS know enough personal users, but MS definitely know
that "business sector" and "consumer sector" have different purchasing
decision criterion.

A simple example, most business purchasing would consider "return on
investment" whilst a consumer purchase decision can be purely impulsive
and sensational one. MS should have divided the client Windows OS into
two broad sectors - one for consumer and one for business.

Agreed, but I would add a couple more reasons for the consumer purchase.
Ignorance of other software alternatives, and the "Fred told me this
is what I need."

For the business version, their focus should be on interacting with the
back-end server systems, application servers, messaging servers, and
application compatibility, networking, stability, and so on. In other
words, they should use a more conservative approach for business products.

They could try whatever they want to try for the consumer version
without jeopardizing their business customers' operation.

IMO, this wouldn't be as easy if the business and personal users were
more willing to "shop around" and look for alternatives.

I have no doubt that MS know this because it's really very basic.

The only reason that I could think of for them not to do is - they are
lazy and arrogant and thought they could push everybody to what they
want to.

Kinda thought most knowledgeable folks knew this already. grin

snip

Which brings up the core question, if the change doesn't benefit the
individual using it, of what value is it?

I don't understand the question. My point is that people have no
problems for adopting new technologies and products if they can
"experience" the benefits.

Your point assumes people will see benefits, and then want them. I'm
asking, what if the user(s) see no benefits? If users see no benefits,
the what is the value of the changes?

snip


--
Ken

Mac OS X 10.8.3
Firefox 20.0
Thunderbird 17.0.5
LibreOffice 4.0.1.2

On 6/5/2013 11:55, Ken Springer wrote:
On 6/2/13 8:04 AM, xfile wrote:
But there should be a better and easier way for the consumer and
general
public to provide that feedback so new products that are developed
have
a better chance at succeeding.

There are plenty ways to collect data, but the two most important parts
are to design the "right" questions and "correctly interpret" the data.

Inherent in your statement is the assumption the vendor is devising ways
of collecting data. That's not what I mean.

I mean a way for the end user to voluntarily offer unbiased, unvarnished
opinions. Even if the opinion is "It's crap!" LOL

I've yet to take a poll or survey of any kind that allowed me to tell
the data collector exactly what I thought of X. And many are worded so
negatives are easily weeded out.

When I was a young marketing manager, I used to play what we called
"mystery customer" game by walking into stores observing how sales and
customers interacted and how customer select and use products. I also
pretended to be an ordinary customer and asked all kinds of dumb
questions just to see how sales would treat a customer like me. This has
become a personal hobby.

Every so often I get a spam mail wanting me to be a "mystery shopper".
grin

I suspect that some are better than others at doing this.

Just a personal opinion, but I don't think MS knows much about it's
personal users. Large corporations and governments, yes.

Actually, MS should have collected enough "personal usage data" with its
embedded phone-home "feature" and other marketing mechanisms.

But can that "personal usage data" differentiate *how* the user is using
the product. Is Word being used to write legal briefs, or as a page
layout program? Is Excel being used to crunch numbers for a science
project, a financial prediction of some type, or as a database?

Those things require different features, how would the personal usage
data know what the user is ultimately doing? The only way I can think
of is for the phone home feature to report on the actual info generated
by the user, which everyone says they don't do.

Regardless of if MS know enough personal users, but MS definitely know
that "business sector" and "consumer sector" have different purchasing
decision criterion.

A simple example, most business purchasing would consider "return on
investment" whilst a consumer purchase decision can be purely impulsive
and sensational one. MS should have divided the client Windows OS into
two broad sectors - one for consumer and one for business.

Agreed, but I would add a couple more reasons for the consumer purchase.
Ignorance of other software alternatives, and the "Fred told me this
is what I need."

For the business version, their focus should be on interacting with the
back-end server systems, application servers, messaging servers, and
application compatibility, networking, stability, and so on. In other
words, they should use a more conservative approach for business
products.

They could try whatever they want to try for the consumer version
without jeopardizing their business customers' operation.

IMO, this wouldn't be as easy if the business and personal users were
more willing to "shop around" and look for alternatives.

I have no doubt that MS know this because it's really very basic.

The only reason that I could think of for them not to do is - they are
lazy and arrogant and thought they could push everybody to what they
want to.

Kinda thought most knowledgeable folks knew this already. grin

snip

Which brings up the core question, if the change doesn't benefit the
individual using it, of what value is it?

I don't understand the question. My point is that people have no
problems for adopting new technologies and products if they can
"experience" the benefits.

Your point assumes people will see benefits, and then want them. I'm
asking, what if the user(s) see no benefits? If users see no benefits,
the what is the value of the changes?

snip




Your point assumes people will see benefits, and then want them. I'm
asking, what if the user(s) see no benefits? If users see no benefits,
the what is the value of the changes?

1. If the users see no benefits - they may not be your intended
users/customers. Do you remember what I said earlier that - Does one
know who are their customers?

It sounds like a stupid and insulting question, but it's not. Seriously,
lots of people don't know who are their customers because people buying
things for different reasons and for different benefits, and it's not
that easy to just say, as an example, SOHO (small office and home
office) is my target customers.

When I used the terms, "consumer" and "business", they are just the
highest layer of classifications, and there are more criterion under
each sector. But getting into that topic is complicated so I will skip.

2. If they are your intended customers/users and still don't see the
benefits, it's the provider who didn't do the job right. This is
related to the previous question, do you know who they are? And then,
you need to understand them, what they want and care and what are not.

As for your last question, if users really can't see no benefits, no
value of the changes because the changes are not designed for the
(intended) user/customers.

But please note that, as you may already know, there are "intangible"
benefits that is not so obvious and will not be perceived equally by
all. Another quick example, "exclusivity" is one of the benefits that
people buy high-end products such as a dress, a purse, a car, an
antique, so on. Exclusivity is a pure "physiological" and "intangible"
benefit.

Agreed, but I would add a couple more reasons for the consumer
purchase. Ignorance of other software alternatives, and the "Fred
told me this is what I need."

True, and notice that I said - A simple example? I just used a quick one
to make my point, and it's more complicated.

Your example could be what is called "opinion leaders" and firms
including MS have invested a lot on pleasing opinion leaders (and MVP
program is one of those MS programs) so, in hope, they could provide
favorable opinions about the provider.

In general, techies and geeks and advanced users are all common opinion
leaders targeted by tech companies (celebrities as well for different
groups and purposes) because they are the ones would be consulted and
asked by friends, neighbors, colleagues, and so on when it comes to
buying a product. Spokespersons in commercials are also based on the
similar concept except many firms don't use spokespersons anymore
because when it comes to a "real person", there are always those who
love this person and those who hate this person, so it's a mixed result.

You see more and more animated characters in commercials because firms
want to avoid different opinions (positive + negative = debates) toward
a person, a group, and so on, and if debates happen, the core messages
of the ads. are forgotten which means that other than "publicity" which
sometimes is the purpose, the ads. is wasted.

But can that "personal usage data" differentiate *how* the user is
using the product. Is Word being used to write legal briefs, or as a
page layout program? Is Excel being used to crunch numbers for a
science project, a financial prediction of some type, or as a database?

Those things require different features, how would the personal usage
data know what the user is ultimately doing? The only way I can think
of is for the phone home feature to report on the actual info
generated by the user, which everyone says they don't do.

Frankly speaking, I don't know how personal usage data were collected
and sent either by MS or other vendors, and none of them is willing to
disclose, so I have no clear answer.

But theoretically speaking, it could since every time you clicked a
function, it could be logged and sent.

A (costly) focus group study is what is commonly used for
examining/studying how potential/current users use a product. But then
again, you need to select "right" sample which takes us back to the
initial question, do you know who are your customers, because the answer
will affect the sample quality which means that, if choosing wrong
samples, the entire experiment could be wasted.

Another quick example for the mistake commonly made by tech companies:
If the product is designed for "ordinary consumer", you cannot use
geeks, techies, and engineers as the tester for usage (for debugging,
yes), you have to use "ordinary folks" as testers. You certainly cannot
design the product from the perspective of a geek, a techie, and
definitely not of an engineer, because their skill-set and knowledge
level are totally different than and way above the potential
customer/user.

This is a typical example of using a "wrong sample" for product design.
And remember what I said about Steve Jobs that how he looked at a
product through the eyes of consumer? That is the correct approach for
"consumer products".

You use geeks for testing geek's products, and you use ordinary consumer
for testing consumer's products. This idea, unfortunately, still cannot
be completely recognized and accepted by computer industry, whilst it's
a common sense for most other industries.

In my personal opinion, nothing can substitute the genuine care from the
bottom of the provider's heart about their customers. If they really
care (as we are), there are many scientific and non-scientific methods,
but if they don't, nothing will and can help.

I mean a way for the end user to voluntarily offer unbiased,
unvarnished opinions. Even if the opinion is "It's crap!" LOL

There is no such thing called "unbiased" opinions from the end users.
And no opinion is crap - at least that is what I think.

Remember what I said about people have no problems for adopting new
products and technologies if they can "experience" the benefits?

Do you know why? Because it's for their "self interests", and
self-interest is not always a bad thing, and they absolutely should do
so when it comes to spend their hard-earned money.

If one knows something can benefit him/her in business or personal life
(tangible or intangible - such as lifestyle), out of their
self-interests, they will be more than happy to use it. It's human
nature.

Therefore, opinions and feedback provided from the end users are mostly
for their self-interests in terms of how the product can better serve
them (which is right, and again, it's their money to spend).

As a product provider, especially a large one, what do you do with so
many voices?

Again, back to lesson 101, ask yourself who are your customers, and
screen out voices from those who are not the core customers and focus on
your real/core customers.

What about other voices? If there are many (depending on each company's
definition), you may want to create additional product variations or
even brands to address the needs. But some companies chose not to,
because there is a risk of conflicting positioning images caused by
different product lines that could screw up the entire company's
positioning. And every company has "limited" resources for them to do
things. In any case, it's a case-by-case situation for each product
provider to consider and resolve.

If you want to offer your feedback, you could call (or write) their
customer service and tell them how you feel about the product and where
needs to be improved - provided if they care to listen and take action.

I've yet to take a poll or survey of any kind that allowed me to tell
the data collector exactly what I thought of X. And many are worded
so negatives are easily weeded out.

Seriously? They didn't even bother to leave a "additional comments"
section?

On the other hand, your voice may have been heard just that you don't
know. Example, a serious product provider will go through and examine
each and every customer complaint/request received from current and/or
potential customers and there are all kinds of statics models for
analyzing the data so the provider can dig into the root cause of the
problems - if they care, to solve not just the current problem surfaced
but the root cause to prevent related problems from happening again.

Well-trained sales (including in-store sales) are also important in
terms of carrying back messages for why or why not a customer purchases
the product. So if you made a customer service request, you voice has
been delivered.

Some also use sales trends analysis (short- and long-term) for their
customer feedback - they don't buy because they don't like it.

Again, it doesn't have to be a survey or focus groups or expensive
research reports from independent research firms and so on, a sincere
product provider will have so many ways to know their customers, if they
care to do so.

The problem for Microsoft (since this thread is about their product,
Windows 8) is that they don't know who and what are they competing against.

A quick summary of their rivals:

Apple positions itself as a consumer (electronics) product company. If
one pays close attention to Apple's marketing, Apple, especially during
Steve Jobs' era, deliberately disassociated itself with the
business/corporate image.

Apple's product positioning is what I will call "intimate personal
things" for trendy folks (or wannabe, and this group is in every product
category) that they want to carry and use wherever they go and whenever
they want to.

Apple's main rival, Samsung is also an experienced OEM + consumer
electronics product company.

Google is not a tech company nor a search engine company as many would
have thought.

Google is an advertising company.

Every service and app provided by Google would be TV programs provided
by a TV station, and the purpose is to attract audience (that is, active
users in Google's case) so Google can provide a large amount of
"accurate usage data' to advertisers whom are Google's paying customers.

Google is moving to business users, slowly and cautiously, with the same
concept, and their infamous "beta" label is to tell business: It's not
ready and use at your own risk. Their subscription fees, as far as I
can tell, are marginal revenues to cover the extra cost of developing
and maintaining business solutions that they can't cancel as easily as
their consumer apps based on "rating".

MS was and still is an OEM software company because most, if not all, of
their products, except XBOX and the recent Surface series, are part of a
computer system. Their major partners are OEM hardware vendors (e.g.
Intel, Dell, etc.) and their major channels are OEM channels.

None of their core products, be client/server OS, Office, development
tools, Exchange server, SQL sever, etc., can be used by itself and all
need a host - a computer system, in order to functioning.

In the eyes of many consumers and business, MS only provide part of
computing solution whilst the entire computing solution is either built
by another vendor or themselves. This is an OEM business.

Although MS has every right to change their business model but
considering the reality, how is it possible for an OEM software company
with little experience in consumer and the final finished products to
compete "simultaneously" against two veteran consumer product companies
(Apple and Samsung) and an veteran advertising company (Google) that is
good at using Internet technology for services, not to mention that MS
also wants to be the leader overnight and to create "synergy" across all
of their products for the maximum returns and to keep all their existing
customers?

Anyone with this big ambitious has only one result - a total failure.

In fact, Microsoft is so clueless that they don't even know "what" are
they competing against; it's not about "cloud technologies" nor
"web-based applications" nor "retina display" nor "APP store", and it's
all about different business models with different customer base.

Windows 8 is a product created under such confusion and ambitious for
which MS is trying to use to compete against all of the above.

Did I mention a question that appears to be silly and insulting - Does
one know who are their customers?

As you may see, the answer is not always so obvious as most of us would
have thought.

This is one of the most important questions that a company and their
executives have to ask over and over again, because if we got it wrong,
every resources dispensed is wasted and will be, using your words, "of
no value".

That's all I have to say.

On Tue, 07 May 2013 10:20:00 -0400, usenetopian
wrote:

This has been asked before but I forget the answers given (sorry)
can anyone recommend a great Start button replacement for Windows 8?
Thanks in advance

You wont need them anymore. Here is a sneak preview of Windows
8.1start button:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jA8zcwj0AGw

[]'s
--
Don't be evil - Google 2004
We have a new policy - Google 2012

On Thu, 06 Jun 2013 13:02:08 -0300, Shadow wrote:

On Tue, 07 May 2013 10:20:00 -0400, usenetopian
wrote:

This has been asked before but I forget the answers given (sorry)
can anyone recommend a great Start button replacement for Windows 8?
Thanks in advance

You wont need them anymore. Here is a sneak preview of Windows
8.1start button:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jA8zcwj0AGw


Sorry, but I completely disagree with you. The Windows 8.1 Start
button will do hardly anything, and is nothing like what it was in
previous versions of Windows. It still will not produce a Start menu.
See, for example,
http://www.zdnet.com/windows-8-1-unv...e539&ttag=e539

As far as I'm concerned, a Start button replacement for Windows 8 is
still a very valuable thing to add, and one I recommend continues to
be Start8 (http://www.stardock.com/products/start8/)


--
Ken Blake

On Thu, 06 Jun 2013 10:38:33 -0700, Ken Blake
wrote:

On Thu, 06 Jun 2013 13:02:08 -0300, Shadow wrote:

On Tue, 07 May 2013 10:20:00 -0400, usenetopian
wrote:

This has been asked before but I forget the answers given (sorry)
can anyone recommend a great Start button replacement for Windows 8?
Thanks in advance

You wont need them anymore. Here is a sneak preview of Windows
8.1start button:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jA8zcwj0AGw


Sorry, but I completely disagree with you.

You didn't see the funny side. Did you watch the video ?
[]'s
--
Don't be evil - Google 2004
We have a new policy - Google 2012

Shadow wrote:

usenetopian wrote:

can anyone recommend a great Start button replacement for Windows 8?

You wont need them anymore.

Yes I will, because I want a start MENU not just an ICON to double-up as
the Windows key. Stardock realise this, why are Microsoft pretending
not to realise?

On Thu, 06 Jun 2013 15:13:53 -0300, Shadow wrote:

On Thu, 06 Jun 2013 10:38:33 -0700, Ken Blake
wrote:

On Thu, 06 Jun 2013 13:02:08 -0300, Shadow wrote:

On Tue, 07 May 2013 10:20:00 -0400, usenetopian
wrote:

This has been asked before but I forget the answers given (sorry)
can anyone recommend a great Start button replacement for Windows 8?
Thanks in advance

You wont need them anymore. Here is a sneak preview of Windows
8.1start button:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jA8zcwj0AGw


Sorry, but I completely disagree with you.

You didn't see the funny side. Did you watch the video ?
[]'s

You made me decide to watch it. I especially liked the line "Ah, that's
very funny, Microsoft..." :-)

--
Gene E. Bloch (Stumbling Bloch)

On Thu, 06 Jun 2013 15:13:53 -0300, Shadow wrote:

On Thu, 06 Jun 2013 10:38:33 -0700, Ken Blake
wrote:

On Thu, 06 Jun 2013 13:02:08 -0300, Shadow wrote:

On Tue, 07 May 2013 10:20:00 -0400, usenetopian
wrote:

This has been asked before but I forget the answers given (sorry)
can anyone recommend a great Start button replacement for Windows 8?
Thanks in advance

You wont need them anymore. Here is a sneak preview of Windows
8.1start button:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jA8zcwj0AGw


Sorry, but I completely disagree with you.

You didn't see the funny side. Did you watch the video ?


I didn't. Sorry to have misunderstood.

--
Ken Blake

On Thu, 06 Jun 2013 15:13:53 -0300, Shadow wrote:

On Thu, 06 Jun 2013 10:38:33 -0700, Ken Blake
wrote:

On Thu, 06 Jun 2013 13:02:08 -0300, Shadow wrote:

On Tue, 07 May 2013 10:20:00 -0400, usenetopian
wrote:

This has been asked before but I forget the answers given (sorry)
can anyone recommend a great Start button replacement for Windows 8?
Thanks in advance

You wont need them anymore. Here is a sneak preview of Windows
8.1start button:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jA8zcwj0AGw


Sorry, but I completely disagree with you.

You didn't see the funny side. Did you watch the video ?
[]'s
--
Don't be evil - Google 2004
We have a new policy - Google 2012

--
Ken Blake

On Thu, 06 Jun 2013 12:57:51 -0700, Ken Blake
wrote:

You wont need them anymore. Here is a sneak preview of Windows
8.1start button:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jA8zcwj0AGw


Sorry, but I completely disagree with you.

You didn't see the funny side. Did you watch the video ?


I didn't. Sorry to have misunderstood.

Knocked the wind out of me. I am speechless. I didn't know
people apologized on Usenet.

[]'s
--
Don't be evil - Google 2004
We have a new policy - Google 2012

On Thu, 06 Jun 2013 17:58:44 -0300, Shadow wrote:

On Thu, 06 Jun 2013 12:57:51 -0700, Ken Blake
wrote:

You wont need them anymore. Here is a sneak preview of Windows
8.1start button:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jA8zcwj0AGw


Sorry, but I completely disagree with you.

You didn't see the funny side. Did you watch the video ?


I didn't. Sorry to have misunderstood.

Knocked the wind out of me. I am speechless. I didn't know
people apologized on Usenet.




I try not to have to very often, but if I do, I do. g


--
Ken Blake

On 6/5/13 8:04 PM, xfile wrote:
On 6/5/2013 11:55, Ken Springer wrote:
On 6/2/13 8:04 AM, xfile wrote:

snip

Your point assumes people will see benefits, and then want them. I'm
asking, what if the user(s) see no benefits? If users see no benefits,
the what is the value of the changes?

1. If the users see no benefits - they may not be your intended
users/customers. Do you remember what I said earlier that - Does one
know who are their customers?

My basic point about MS not knowing who theirs are either, except
probably the large corporate sector.

It sounds like a stupid and insulting question, but it's not. Seriously,
lots of people don't know who are their customers because people buying
things for different reasons and for different benefits, and it's not
that easy to just say, as an example, SOHO (small office and home
office) is my target customers.

I wouldn't consider the question stupid and insulting at all.

I suspect the question is harder to answer when you write a program that
does a lot of different things, as opposed to a program with a specific
purpose in mind. I.E. using a word processor as a page layout program,
instead of using a page layout program.

I'm working on a personal writing project for which I thought I'd try a
document processor, in this case Scrivener. It's actually intended for
script writers, but for me this is a terrific find. The jury is still
out, but if the scales keep tipping as they are now, I'll never use a
word processor again.

snip

But can that "personal usage data" differentiate *how* the user is
using the product. Is Word being used to write legal briefs, or as a
page layout program? Is Excel being used to crunch numbers for a
science project, a financial prediction of some type, or as a database?

Those things require different features, how would the personal usage
data know what the user is ultimately doing? The only way I can think
of is for the phone home feature to report on the actual info
generated by the user, which everyone says they don't do.

Frankly speaking, I don't know how personal usage data were collected
and sent either by MS or other vendors, and none of them is willing to
disclose, so I have no clear answer.

But theoretically speaking, it could since every time you clicked a
function, it could be logged and sent.

I don't see that as a guarantee of how the results of the program may be
used.

snip

Another quick example for the mistake commonly made by tech companies:
If the product is designed for "ordinary consumer", you cannot use
geeks, techies, and engineers as the tester for usage (for debugging,
yes), you have to use "ordinary folks" as testers. You certainly cannot
design the product from the perspective of a geek, a techie, and
definitely not of an engineer, because their skill-set and knowledge
level are totally different than and way above the potential
customer/user.

If they bother to write a manual, they should have the manual written by
the folks that will be using the program, not the ones that wrote the code.

snip

I mean a way for the end user to voluntarily offer unbiased,
unvarnished opinions. Even if the opinion is "It's crap!" LOL

There is no such thing called "unbiased" opinions from the end users.
And no opinion is crap - at least that is what I think.

By unbiased, I meant having the survey created in such a manner that the
negative opinions flow as easily into the results as the positive ones.

Agreed, no opinion is crap, even if that's what you think of the
product. LOL

If one knows something can benefit him/her in business or personal life
(tangible or intangible - such as lifestyle), out of their
self-interests, they will be more than happy to use it. It's human
nature.

Which is why I like Scrivener so far.

snip

I've yet to take a poll or survey of any kind that allowed me to tell
the data collector exactly what I thought of X. And many are worded
so negatives are easily weeded out.

Seriously? They didn't even bother to leave a "additional comments"
section?

When I wrote that, I wasn't thinking all that well. Some do, some
don't, and anymore, I'm so tired of the poll question popping up I
automatically say no. G

Apple positions itself as a consumer (electronics) product company. If
one pays close attention to Apple's marketing, Apple, especially during
Steve Jobs' era, deliberately disassociated itself with the
business/corporate image.

The disassociating from that image may be starting to haunt me. :-)
I've got a project idea, of which Scrivener is a part, and I may have to
do it in Windows since I'm having a hard time finding the tools I
want/need to be efficient in the OS X realm. :-(

The rumor mill I heard is that OX 10.9 will have a lot of improvements
for power users, although I've no good idea for what those improvements
are. The one feature I've heard of is tabbed Finder windows, which I
already have via a 3rd party utility.

I still hope I can get enough irons out of the fire to have some time to
spend with Linux, if nothing else just to learn and find out what's in
that computing arena.

Apple's product positioning is what I will call "intimate personal
things" for trendy folks (or wannabe, and this group is in every product
category) that they want to carry and use wherever they go and whenever
they want to.

I wonder if their true long term plan isn't to get that trendy group
hooked on their products. Many of this group will be the new incoming
employees of large corporations. Perhaps the idea is, if the "newbies"
are hooked on Apple products, they are going to want to use Apple
products at work.

snip

Did I mention a question that appears to be silly and insulting - Does
one know who are their customers?

Why, no, I don't believe you have! LOL

That's all I have to say.

:-) Yea, we should let this go. It's so OT from the original question.

I've enjoyed the conversation, xfile, take care.



--
Ken

Mac OS X 10.8.4
Firefox 20.0
Thunderbird 17.0.5
LibreOffice 4.0.1.2