Slashdot Log In
What Should One Know to be Truly Computer Literate?
Posted by
Cliff
on Tue May 23, 2006 08:55 PM
from the where's-the-on-switch dept.
from the where's-the-on-switch dept.
rbannon asks: "Computer literacy is becoming an increasingly used term in education, and more and more schools are being asked to set computer literacy goals for their students. Unfortunately for too many, it means being able to use Microsoft products, and that's all. However, I see it much differently, and I cannot help but think that computer literacy is all about using computers to be able to communicate more effectively. With that in mind does anyone have any recommendations for computer literacy goals, and how to measure them?"
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
It's all about context (Score:4, Insightful)
FOr the average office worker it's knowing how to use MS Office. For the Hardware Engineer it means something completely different and for the software developer it's different again.
You can only be "truly computer literate" in the context of a particular field.
It's like asking for a "skilled driver" - skilled to what level? Skilled enough to navigate through suburban traffic or to compete in a Gran Prix?
context: education (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:context: education (Score:4, Funny)
I guess it means we need [Computer] Shop Class? Or do we need [Computer] Driver's Ed? Or we could just stick with the wonderful car analogy (don't you just loooooove car analogies?) and have both!
Surprisingly, that may actually make sense.
Re:context: education (Score:5, Interesting)
I work for the department of a community college that teaches computer skills to adults who are seeking entry level jobs. Our clientelle are generally funded by one of half a dozen different State grants. We've got a proven track record of taking persons off State assistance programs and turning them into taxpayers.
In this milieu, I think "computer literacy" can be regarded as a continuum with definite upper and lower boundaries:
Note that it is entirely possible for someone with extensive programming or sysadmin skills to score pretty low on this continuum. I have met such people. It almost seems as though some people can learn to shoe a horse without ever learning the basics about how to ride one.
Re:context: education (Score:5, Interesting)
One of my... well, in the USA I guess would be called majors in college... is Information Science, which we students describe as a kind of Computer Science Lite. Nothing like the hard work people in Electrical Engineering and Computer Science put in, anyway. However, people here are being taught about several kinds of computer literacy:
At least there's Notepad++ for us who know that it's there.
Anyway, that's why we're starting a club which may well, depending on the interest, develop into an informal parallel study. There are enough of us who know enough about many different areas and who are willing to learn more. So we plan to:
We're sure we'll get more ideas in time... but I meant this to show at least some of the differences in our views on computer literacy as compared to most of our teachers'. On the other hand, we can expect some of the other kind of teachers to join our courses, so not everything is lost in advance.
Re:context: education (Score:5, Interesting)
Basic computer hardware knowledge
Knowing how to fix basic problems with a computer. In some computer labs, the students would "reserve" desktop systems for themselves by turning the brightness all the way down or by loosening the video cable. Other students would just assume the machine was broken and send a fault notice to the helpdesk.
Basic filesystem knowledge - how to create/delete directories, move and copy files. Being able to use CD-ROM/DVD burners, USB keys
Basic keyboarding skills - being able to write punctuated text in a notepad style
text editor.
Basic computer communication skills - knowing how to receive, send, forward and edit E-mail. Understanding of mailing list etiquette. For large corporations, people would blindly use reply-to-all when they have received an E-mail from a mailing list that they were added to by default and tried to unsubscribe.
Basic workdprocessing/spreadsheet skills - being able to load, edit, print and save files, and export these in a variety of file formats.
Basic webpage authoring - how to create webpages with images, hyperlinks and text.
Re:context: education (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:It's all about context (Score:3, Interesting)
Kinda have to disagree, computer literacy is the same as regular literacy. The more literate you are the easier it is to switch context and still gain useful knowledge.
The average office worker is not as computer literate as a software developer becaus
Re:It's all about context (Score:5, Insightful)
Agreed, but I was coming from the point of view that the term "computer literate" is used so broadly that it requires a context to make any sense of what it actually refers to. There is no one single objective definition of computer literacy that everyone will agree on.
For example:
Computer literate to me means that one has knowledge of computer system architecture at the hardware level (where the actual "computer" computes) and that they can easily adapt their knowledge from one system to another.
But that's not the same as when a job vacancy is posted for a Receptionist to be "computer literate" yet because of the context of the job description, we all know that it really means that they're after a person who can use MS Office (or equivilant).
Re:It's all about context (Score:5, Insightful)
Certainly, there are quirky programs and systems that require more investigation than the others (blender, I'm looking at you), but if you really and truly grok these points, you are computer-literate.
Your car analogy works against you here. When I climb into the van we have at work, I drive more slowly and cautiously because it doesn't work quite like I'm used to. The fact that I know how to look for the controls to start, steer, and stop means I am 'driving-literate' even if I have to hunt for the seat-adjustment lever every time I drive that monster. Just because I know nothing about lisp, and am thus unable to use emacs to it's full potential, does not mean I am computer illiterate; it means I am unfamiliar with this particular windshield-wiper control. I'll figure out how to use emacs eventually though, because I am literate enough to do so.
And abilities that carry (Score:5, Insightful)
Program agnosticism: They should know roughly how chat programs work. This doesn't mean AIM, this means that they know enough that they can walk up to any chat system and make it do useful things. Same thing for e-mail clients. Same thing for Browsers. You should be able to give them a laptop loaded up with Windows or Knoppix or SkyOS, and they should be able to quickly muddle their way over to myspace.com.
Hardware knowledge: This is your power supply. When it breaks, things tend to smoke. This is a hard drive. When it breaks, it makes a "click click click Screeeeech!" noise. This is your graphics card. Also known as the hole you'll be pouring your money into for the rest of your life. I'm not saying everyone should have memorised the jumper settings on their motherboard. But they shouldn't be afraid to open the thing up and look or make changes.
Some Scripting: I don't care what scripting language. I don't care if you're talking Perl, Word macros, applescript, AutoHotKey, a command line script, an e-mail filter, or Java. If they can write things in a scripting language, even a completely visual handholding one, they're good. You don't need to fully program or compile. You don't even need to be that great at it. You just need to be able to think about the problem in terms of "how do I tell this computer how to do something."
Re:And abilities that carry (Score:5, Insightful)
While I agree the skills you list are really good ones to have and that everyone should possess them, I think it is far beyond what should be required of literacy. As defined, literacy is simply the ability to read and write. This implies at the most basic level. It doesn't include understanding metaphors and hyperboles, it doesn't include many things that we seem to think the average person in this world should understand in order to be able to survive, it is the bare minimum they need to know to get by. If you were to come upon someone who was considered only literate in the English language, they would probably be able to read and write at the level of a fifth grader. Clearly not the most ideal for the world, but they would likely be able to read a shopping list or basic forms required for living. Likewise, computer literacy should simply include the basics. While I applaud your desire for everyone to know scripting, the fact of the matter is that very few computer users percentage wise know/understand how to do it and I think it is above and beyond what should be required to consider someone computer literate. My mother for example. She is able to send/receive email, type at a reasonable pace, browse the web and purchase things online, etc. and I would consider her computer literate--she is able to get by in her daily routine with the use of the computer and not call me every 2 seconds confused about everything. She could never in a million years start to get her head around writing a script in Perl. For God's sake it's kind of a bitch for me to get something like REGEXs right the first time and I'm a pretty seasoned programmer. I can't even imagine trying to explain those bad boys to my Mom or any "average" computer user for that matter.
I think computer literacy is much simpler and basic than you are making it out to be.
Re:It's all about context (Score:4, Insightful)
Even if the only outcome would be to get rid of those Comic-Sans memos and letters it would be time well spent.
Re:It's all about context (Score:5, Insightful)
Interesting anecdote: on my first day in my Statics class at Tech (a Civil Engineering class), the professor asked everyone if they were computer literate or not. Now, keep in mind that everyone including engineering students is required to own their own computer and take an introductory computing class (nowadays based on Matlab (for engineers), but a few years ago when I was a freshman it was Scheme).
I was the only person that raised his hand. When the professor asked why, I answered "because I know how to program the computer, and how it works internally." (It was apparently a good answer, because he found me a programming job for the summer, but I digress...) : )
Anyway, the point is, I could call myself "computer literate" while all the other engineering students couldn't because I was the only one who was also a CS major. In my opinion, it's having those kinds of skills -- or at least the ability to think in a CS sort of way -- that makes a person computer literate, even if they're an engineer (or manager, or whatever).
Re:It's all about context (Score:4, Insightful)
My mom works on a computer all day. She can figure out how to use the new programs when the company switches. She knows how to protect herself from viruses, not to open random suspicious attachments, and can fix most simple issues (such as fixing formatting issues in her word programs). She can find her way around well enough to use OpenOffice.org when she learned on MSOffice. She could not program a "Hello World" application in anything though. She could probably make it show up on a web page (she used to code her website by hand after I tought her the basics, but that was years ago).
I, as well as most IT people I have worked with, would consider her computer literate. She knows enough to know WHAT questions to ask when she calls for help, and how to do what she is told by the IT guys when they respond without having to say "third button from the right, down 2". I can tell her to look for something along the lines of ___________. Such as, if I tell her to look for an address book, she won't completely overlook it because it's called contact list in her program. At most she'd ask "might this be it?"
People do not need to know how to program, or all the inner workings to be literate. You can get a drivers license without being a mechanic. A drivers license states (theoretically anyway) that you are car/traffic rule literate enough to operate a car safely and effectively. Although this isn't on the test, chances are you know to look for a gas station when the guage points to E, and how to figure out where to put gas in any car you drive, even if the door is not in the same place it is on your car.
I have to go along with this post for my opinion. http://ask.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=186509&ci
obviously... (Score:5, Funny)
Re:obviously... (Score:4, Funny)
01011001 01100101 01110000 00101100 00100000 01110100 01101000 01100001 01110100 00100111
01110011 00100000 01110100 01101000 01100101 00100000 01101111 01101110 01101100 01111001
00100000 01100110 01110101 01100011 01101011 01101001 01101110 01100111 00100000 01110111
01100001 01111001 00101110 00100000 00101110 00100000 00101110
Simple (Score:5, Funny)
Just stay one step ahead.
Re:Simple (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Simple (Score:5, Funny)
I know I am a bit hardcore with this, but (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:I know I am a bit hardcore with this, but (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:I know I am a bit hardcore with this, but (Score:5, Interesting)
Onto the operating system. A person who considers themselves "computer literate" should be able to describe the basic purpose of an operating system and use the OS they are most familiar with in an efficient manner. The person should also be able to maintain the system - install and update AV or Malware protection and describe the purpose of each, apply service packs to the OS and installed applications and describe their purpose, upgrade shrinkwrapped applications (or applications that are comparable to that now antiquated term, I'm simply not including the ability to download source and config/make/make install here).
I believe those are the basic qualifications for today's computer literate person.
That's unreasonable (Score:5, Insightful)
David
Not really... (Score:3, Insightful)
Yes, I also believe a "normal everyday user" should understand what a "hard drive" is and b
Re:I know I am a bit hardcore with this, but (Score:5, Insightful)
I can suggest several branches of computer literacy:
1): the ability to interact with common GUIs. Know what a mouse is, be able to click it and make things happen. As a bonus, add right-click (or whatever the hell you Mac people do). Learn to read dialog boxes and respond to them.
2): Learn to open common applications, and interact with common applications such as a web browser and a word processor. Know what a file is and how to save one. Know what the directory structure is and at least one way to navigate it.
3): Absolute basic hardware! Be able to take your computer apart, move it to a different room, stick all the things in the back in, and have it work as it did before. Knowing the various jacks by sight might get bonus points, but isn't strictly necessary.
4): Regular maintenance. Know what a virus is, and why you have to keep your virus definitions up to date. Know what a patch is, and why you're supposed to install one.
5): More theory. Learn basic technical concepts, like what an operating system is, what an application is, the difference between memory, hard drive, processor, networking.
6): Internet basics. Understand that when your computer loads up a web page, it's actually talking to another computer. Understand the concept of "bandwidth" (using a hose analogy if needed). Understand the difference between the Web and the Internet. Know that computers identify each other by numbers known as "addresses", and that the domain names are simply a way of mapping from memorable names to those numbers.
7): Security. Know what a firewall is and what it does. Understand why you don't run attachments sent by random people. Have some idea of what constitutes a good password.
I think if you know all this, it would be a rather stingy society that wouldn't call you "computer literate". Your approach would probably go a long way towards getting some of the concepts down, but it's only a starting point.
Interaction, information organisation, networking (Score:5, Insightful)
The basic rule of thumb I would use is that if you've taught them with one operating system, and they don't have any difficulty accomplishing the same tasks with another operating system of the same basic design, then they've learnt the basic concepts well enough as opposed to learning by rote what to click.
They're missing the point. (Score:5, Insightful)
Give a man a fish, feed him for a day. Teach a man to fish, feed him for a lifetime. Teach a man to learn things for himself, and he'll be a hell of a lot more than a fisherman.
The Key Skill Is Ability to Learn (Score:5, Interesting)
Not to sound too cliché, but Google and the Internet are at the center of this. Much like books eliminated the need for memorization and transmission by oral tradition, Google and the Internet revolutionize how one learns and adapts. Teach your students how to learn and adapt. Teach them skills on ways to search for information, ways to evaluate what information is good, and what is trash, and teach them how to contribute back information for others to learn from their experiences, good or bad.
To evaluate them, give them novel, creative problems and the tools to learn how to adapt to the environment, and search for solutions. Evaluate their ability to use the resources at their disposal to come up with their own solutions to the problems. This is infinitely better than training them to rote memorize solutions to static problems.
I'd like to see a day where a skill that is searched for on a resumé is no longer a specific ability with a specific tool, but simply the line "Fast and adaptive learner" or "Excel at creative solution design in novel environments." That's what I'd be looking for in an employee, and for future generations of technology users.
Try stuff! (Score:5, Insightful)
Too many people are afraid they'll break the computer and resort to memorizing what they are shown. Since they only do the one thing they are trained to they are unable to grasp the underlying components and what it all means.
To be literate you have to tinker. Try stuff. Break things, get someone to fix them. Then try some different stuff.
As an educational goal (Score:5, Insightful)
A computer literate person should be one who grasps a foundation of knowledge that prevents dead ends and allows learning whatever the current task requires.
The key concept would have to be that a computer is a playback device for software, that whoever controls the software owns the computer (yes, owns. Which gives you more control, being handed car keys, or being handed a root password?), and that some software is much better than other software. Teach that and you've cured all the people who think Internet Explorer is "the internet".
If you want to teach people to use a computer to commmunicate better, then teach them to communicate better. Outlining is a skill that is even more useful for web pages than it was for text. Good composition skills are indispensable. Old-fashioned "rhetoric" classes have a lot to offer about conveying and supporting ideas. Where text is considered obsolete, teach the "grammar" and "vocabulary" that filmmakers have worked out for multimedia works.
Have a basic knowledge (Score:3, Insightful)
Know what is acomputer, how it works on a basic level, CPU, Memory, Harddrive, Video/Monitor. A computer literate person should know how theese work together under the command of an OS, have a basic idea about what an operating system is and what is the different betwean an OS and an Application
IMHO if one knows these will be able to use basic applications (including MS Office if that is what he/she desires) and call him/herself computer literate.
Understanding that a car has engine, wheel, steering wheel, transmission is necessary to drive a car. Knowing the same basic things about a computer is the same.
Than if they are programmers, network admins, webmasters - they are not computer literate's any more. They are specialized pretty much like car mechanics...
An executive, administrative person etc. is computer literate if he/she knows this - otherwise they are trained monkeys^H^H^H^H^H^H^H users, and are afraid to do anything that wasn't in the training - in consequence they will be unable to use other programs that they are trained in.
a programming language (Score:5, Insightful)
If you know a language, you know what an algorithm is, even if you don't know the word. And if you know what an algorithm is, you pretty much know what a computer is.
I'm a giant fan of that MIT vision -- LOGO for kids, extensible and scriptable apps for adults, cheap laptops for people in parts of the world where money is scarce, open information on the web, etc.
I don't have kids, though, and I've never convinced anyone that their kids would be better of learning LOGO than powerpoint. Everyone says the same thing -- you don't have to be an engineer to drive a car.
I was lucky -- I got to learn about computers with a KIM-1 single board machine, and timesharing on a PDP-10, reading books about games written by hippies. If I wanted to play a game, I'd usually have to port it from one dialect of BASIC to another. It wasn't really hard, and it's not really fair to call them ports. But you had to understand the code at least a little bit.
I think it would be a lot harder to learn from iTunes.
Re:a programming language (Score:4, Insightful)
Hurrah. I learned BASIC when I was 13, and got pretty good at it. Sadly, my family didn't have the money at the time to be able to afford anything computerwise after the Timex/Sinclairs and C64s all went by the wayside. At the same time, I was playing video games at the arcade. Because I knew a programming language, I understood that the computer in the video game was following a set of commands, and could imagine all the lines of BASIC that would accomplish the same thing.
You don't have to be an engineer, but it doesn't hurt knowing how the thing works. I've always insisted that the best way to teach someone how to drive a manual transmission is to start by describing how a clutch works. That clutch pedal - it's connected to something, you know? And when you press it down, something happens. And when you let it up, something else happens.
When you press buttons on your computer keyboard, those inputs are read by programming - and something happens. It's not just magic. Too many people, having absolutely no clue how anything works, just think everything runs on magic.
But it IS magic! (Score:5, Insightful)
What is magic? Words and symbols of power that shape the world according to the will of the magician. The magician speaks the right magic words, and draws the right sigils, and obtains the desired effect.
Meanwhile, the INT 8 half-orc barbarian doesn't have the faintest idea what all the runes carved on his battleaxe actually do. He doesn't care. He knows the end result is a +1 to hit and that suits him just fine. Neither is the ranger concerned about exactly how these enchanted bracers improve his aim with a longbow; they just do. Only the wizard needs to worry about the details.
And what is programming? Words and symbols of power that shape the computer according to the will of the programmer. Type the right instructions, give the right command arguments, and obtain the desired effect.
Ever created an infinite loop? Had a recursive process go berserk on you? Made a small mistake while invoking rm -rf? Yeah. Pure 'Sorcerer's Apprentice'.
We are the nearest thing to magicians that has ever existed in reality. Our spells work and are truly powerful, our mistakes cause incomprehensible chaos, and when one of us turns bad then sometimes the whole world can suffer the consequences. No wonder the muggles treat our creations like they're the mysterious products of a magical power beyond their understanding: that's what they are.
Interesting. (Score:4, Insightful)
As far as software, I think computer literacy means needing to be able to figure out a piece of out-of-the-box software. Not the ability to use word or office, or whatever, but the ability to sit down in front of an unfamiliar piece of software, and fiddle with it in an intelligent way. The ability to look up a manual and read it.
It's not about being a power user. Not everyone is a power user. Most people aren't, really. It's really, in my mind, just about not being helpless when confronted with something new.
Try a Context Switch (Score:5, Insightful)
For example, "What does vehicle literate mean?" A car, like a computer, is a single complex machine that the average person above a certain age is expected to know how to operate. So how does one become "car literate"? Because you know how to drive one vehicle does not mean you can operate a boat or airplane or the space shuttle. So "computer literate" probably does not mean that you can operate any computer, just the most common variety (e.g. Windows and Office). Even then, you might know how to drive an automatic and not a standard (Windows vs Linux).
Analogy is a great tool to not only improve others understanding of a given concept but also your own.
Just for fun consider this: Computer support technicians and doctors are similar in many ways. They are both supposed to be highly paid, highly trained, highly skilled, and highly knowledgeable about an extremely complex machine that they did not design or create and of which cannot possibly know everything about. Often, they rely on their limited experience to make a best guess about the root cause of the machine's particular problem and then follow up with lots of testing to see if they are correct or not. As you probably know, some computer support people, trained and certified or not, seem to have an innate gift for solving computer problems while others should never be allowed to touch a computer. Makes you think about your doctor, eh?
Literacy, like education, isn't about facts... (Score:3, Interesting)
One of the reasons my employer is moving from Tcl to another development platform for Web infrastructure, probably Java, is because they claim they can get more Java programmers than Tcl programmers. While this might be true, I would argue that they will get exactly as many competent, effective Java programmers as they get Tcl programmers, in other words, very few. Any programmer worth the appellation can do his job regardless of the tool.
Equating "literacy" with the ability to use Microsoft Office (or something similar) is like equating mathematics knowledge by memorizing the times tables up to 100. Useful for a very specific, narrow range of tasks, but completely worthless when presented with a new type of problem.
Unfortunately, it is far easier to test for memorization than for actual thinking, and this is the route of least resistance our education system likes to take.
What is "Computer literacy" (Score:4, Interesting)
Yes, many people (especially in the uneducated nations of today's modern Western world) might be able to live a productive life only knowing how to operate a web browser but 'computer literate' they ain't. You can make exactly the same observation about someone who can't write a coherent paragraph, they too can often live a productive life in the lower classes of society, but illiteracy kills off most chances to better oneself.
And I can already hear some witless wonder getting ready to analogize about people not needing to be mechanics to use a car, blah blah. No everyone doesn't need to be able to strip an engine down but they should know where all the major parts are, the basic theory of operation, common failure modes, make a few emergency fixes, etc. You might not be able to write an office suite from scratch but you should be able to write a spreadsheet macro, a simple shell script or be able to at least have a shot at fixing a bug in a larger program that is really annoying you.
It's simple (Score:4, Insightful)
The answer is obvious (Score:5, Funny)
Computer Illiteracy (Score:3, Insightful)
Honestly, the basics haven't changed since the GUI became commonplace. Here are a couple of things that are good to know:
From there you can break it down into more specific areas. For example, Internet, Office, Technical, etc. I know a lot of people consider Internet to be part of the basics. However, it is possible to be computer literate without knowing anything about the Internet. A friend of mine is a retired programmer. He definitely knows his way around his system. He has also taught me a thing or two when it comes to writing a script. However, he is not interested in the Internet. I'd hardly call him illiterate. I've also known a few of engineers that could do some truly amazing things in CAD. However, they don't have a clue when it comes to word processing.
Just a final thought, stay away from anything vendor specific. I took computer information systems in high school and college. Back then the basics were WordPerfect, dBase, and Lotus. After receiving my Associate, I realized that it was all a waste. Everyone wanted Microsoft. I wonder what they will want when my daughter graduates.
Re:The following.... (Score:5, Funny)
Re:The following.... (Score:4, Funny)
Re:The following.... (Score:5, Interesting)
First is the Ctrl-X/V/C. Make sure they understand copy/paste/cut. It is terribly useful and something that a surprisingly small number of computer users seem to know how to use.
READ DIALOG BOXES. This goes with the "no one from Nigeria" stuff. I can't tell you how many people I've helped with computers or errors or questions where the process of helping them consisted of "Did you read the dialog box?" "What does the dialog box say?" "So what should you do?" and that helped them.
Last, and most important UNDERSTAND THE FILESYSTEM. I've gotten my parents quite good at day-to-day use of the computer. It has taken YEARS. That said, I wouldn't consider them computer literate. This is one of the reasons.
So you want to find a file my parents saved. Where is it? That's right... My Documents. Not a sub-folder, just My Documents. That's where there are a few thousand files. Why? Because that is the default save location. Unless it's not. Some programs (AOL, etc) like to save somewhere else. So files saved from those programs are in those folders. Good luck finding anything, especially with the cruddy Windows search function. Spotlight would work well, but then again I gave them Google Desktop and they don't use it (it's easier to just scroll through the list of 3,000 files).
Introducing them to a few basic file types (TXT, JPG, HTML, DOC, XLS, ZIP, etc.) would also be a good step. So would the idea that you can delete a zip file after you unzip it. A decent chunk of the stuff in my parents My Documents folder? Zip files and their contents that Windows or AOL unzipped for them. But since that process is hidden, they don't know to delete the ZIP files or what they are.
In fact, they don't understand files and e-mail either. When you get an attachment in e-mail (say a picture) and you choose to view it and it gets saved to the hard drive... what do you do the next time you want to view that picture? That's right, you go to the e-mail and RE-SAVE the file with the default filename (helpfully with a "(1)" or some such at the end to ensure you have tons of spare copies) and let the right program open up automatically again. E-mail is a foreign land from the file system for all they know. AOL and it's tendencies to keep it's own weird folders and such have NOT helped at all in this regard.
In fact, warn them against AOL in the first place. I can not tell you how many things I've given up teaching because of AOL.
I'll post more if I can think of it. But basic use of the filesystem (especially creating folder and how you can nest folders and use that for organization) is critical.
Re:The following.... (Score:5, Insightful)
How do you go to a website? Do you know what the #1 search on Yahoo is? It's "Google". My parent's computers are set up with Google as the home page. Do you know how they get just about anywhere? Searching google. Want to go to "favoritestore.com"? Well you type "favoritestore.com" in the Google search field and hit Search then click on the right one that comes up. They also use bookmarks. That one took a LONG TIME to break. I can not tell you how many people I've seen with that one.
Also, what is a home page in your web browser? That's the company that sells you your internet service! We subscribe to Google. We never get a bill from them. We do get bills from Comcast for Internet. But that little logical inconsistency doesn't seem to occur to them. I think I've got this one through to my parents too, but I'm not sure. I know it is (at least in part) related to AOL. The fact that you can change this to whatever you want is important and should be mentioned.
The last one for now is a personal pet-peeve of mine. I run into this in the otherwise very smart and computer savvy people in my high level CS classes.
This - / - is a FOREWORD-slash
This - \ - is a BACK-slash
One leans forward, the other leans backward. The terms are NOT INTERCHANGEABLE. The mean DIFFERENT things.
Of course this wouldn't be a problem is MS stuck with / as a path separator for DOS just like UNIX used, but that's another argument.
Re:The following.... (Score:3, Informative)
What's wrong with using bookmarks? Perhaps you should say overuse of bookmarks without any sort of organization is bad, but bookmar
Re:The following.... (Score:5, Insightful)
The fact that noones parents understand the filesystem is an indicator of exactly one thing
THE FILE/FOLDER METAPHOR IS BROKEN
Yes, the whole idea of 'files' is only a metaphor. Even in Unix. A very useful metaphor, sure. But it's not necessary or helpful anymore for the average user.
It's great that files exist, and in *nix-likes are the basis for everything, sure. But the user doesn't need to see these pesky files anymore, they are just confusing him. He should know be one level of abstraction up - working with something we could call a 'document', for want of a better term. He doesn't need to know if his webpage consists of multiple files. It's just a document. If he has the same piece of content in multiple formats, he doesn't need to know that either. It's just a document. He should be able to preserve multiple versions restore points of his document, w/o worrying about having different files with different names. It's just a document.
Fact: most techies understand treelike structures well, and did even before hierarchical filesystems became common currency. For obvious reasons.
Fact: most people's mom encountered her first treelike structure the first day she typed a document in Word, and wanted to save it.
MS realized as far back as W95 that the filesystem hierarchy wasn't particularly intuitive to the average member of the W95 target market. Rather than do something revolutionary and innovative which would have made everyone's lives easier the last 10 years, they mucked around with it a little bit, made some cosmetic changes, tried to please both the new people and the experienced people, and ended up fixing not much, and breaking things which were at least consistent in DOS.
My dad figured out that since he had 2 versions of the folder 'My Documents', one contained in My Computer, and one not (on the desktop), one was storing his files locally, and the other was storing them somewhere else, not on his computer. He even renamed the folder in the C: drive "My documents here" so he could tell them apart. (on winME btw)
This isn't an obligatory MS-bash. IMHO, it's a lot more shocking that no linux distro/desktop manager, has tried to sort this out. They are the ones that have the opportunity to make fairly sweeping changes. Linux users would catch on fast, appreciate an elegant solution, and still be competent to see 'behind the scenes' to the actual filesystem if desired. The same goes for Apple to some extent, and for some slightly different reasons. MS themselves have their hands much more tied as to what they could change, now that everyone has 10 yrs experience of Windows doing it the dumb way.
In a previous slashdot story about similar stuff, someone said that their mom used a single word document to type everything, and printed out the relevant pages each time.
Older people are not stupid, but they are being made to feel stupid by stupid designers, programmers and documenters, and as technology becomes more important this is more and more damaging to their lives.
* to all the older slashdot users, computer able seniors, and slashdotters with techie parents, sorry to make generalizations but they are broadly true..
Re:The following.... (Score:5, Insightful)
THE FILE/FOLDER METAPHOR IS BROKEN
Yes, the whole idea of 'files' is only a metaphor. Even in Unix. A very useful metaphor, sure. But it's not necessary or helpful anymore for the average user.
I'm gonna have to disagree with you on this one. People have been using hierarchical paper files for hundreds if not thousands of years. It's a basic organizational system, and is a minimum for working sanely with large numbers of files. The confusing thing is that the user's files are saved in the same filesystem as all the system and application stuff, so the hierarchy itself is overwhelming. I can understand the need to separate those.
Older people are not stupid, but they are being made to feel stupid by stupid designers, programmers and documenters, and as technology becomes more important this is more and more damaging to their lives.
This is a common argument, but I think you underestimate how hard it is to make things usable. The trick is to make things as simple as you can but still have the necessary features. I think Apple has been hitting a sweet spot here for a while with iLife.
The problem is essentially that many many people do not have the patience to figure out a complex system. They approach a program with the desire to do one thing, and the only way they could be satisfied is if there is a big button on the screen that says "Do the Thing". However, that same user may potentially want to do 100 different things at different times, and they certainly won't be satisfied by a screen filled with one hundred buttons. Hence the purpose of menus, wizards, hierarchies, preferences and all the other complications us geeks know and love.
There are a large number of people who do not want to think about how to do something or where one might logically find some aspect of a computer program. These people get anxious just looking at a dialog box. They do not enjoy figuring things out.
I'm sorry, but you are not going to design an interface that meets the lowest common denominator and is still useful. It just ain't gonna happen. To get to that point what we need is full-blown artificial intelligence. In other words, a replacement for the techie that they call on the phone to tell them how to do something. It's so easy to blame the designer, and I agree a lot of interfaces are horrendous, but the reality is that there is a certain amount of irreducible complexity inherent any moderately useful general purpose computer system. People who want to do one thing and have no patience for learning any context should be given appliances that do the one thing they want. That's the only way to make things usable for them.
Re:How to use non-MS systems (Score:4, Insightful)
The Computer is not the big box on the table
The Harddisk is not the big box under the table
The Color of the box does not matter
It's not "how many RAM's" but "how much RAM"
Level one is realizing that
Text editing is not Word
Spreadsheet is not Excel
Presentation is not Powerpoint
Communication is not Outlook
News is not Explorer
The Internet is not WWW
i.e. realizing what you don't need a specific program to fullfill a specific task.