The Distribution of Users’ Computer Skills: Worse Than You Think (2016) • Hacker News Board

Re: The Distribution of Users’ Computer Skills: Worse Than You Think (2016)

#71

Post by AdieuToLogic » Mon, Sep 23, 2019, 2:55 AM UTC

benologist wrote: post #9

vortico wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I fail to see what open-source software has to do with this data. If someone is unable to move their mouse pointer to the Delete icon of an email client, the license of the software likely has no effect.

Learning how to use, configure and create open source is definitely one of the highest-proficiency forms of computer usage. Especially creating but even using open source requires a bevvy of advanced skills identifying appropriate software and getting it to run. The strongest 5% of computer users they found can barely search email and some % are pursuing incredibly sophisticated skills through open source setting up…

> Learning how to use, configure and create open source is definitely one of the highest-proficiency forms of computer usage.

Some of the most successful accountants, CFO's, and stakeholders I have met would beg to differ.

> I think if they had kept tracking the higher levels of proficiency by the time they got to open source users and developers there is a chasm between their ability to use computers to solve problems vs the 3rd-level person ...

This is a straw man argument[0]. OSS != "higher levels of [computer] proficiency".

0 - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straw_man

Re: The Distribution of Users’ Computer Skills: Worse Than You Think (2016)

#72

Post by eru » Mon, Sep 23, 2019, 2:58 AM UTC

chrischen wrote: post #46

scarface74 wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You pay someone to do it. My uncle has owned a car repair shop for 30+ years and he pays someone to do all of the office work. Your expertise is someone else’s “undifferentiated heavy lifting” no matter what field you’re in.

Well that person doing the repair work isn’t going to use some dumbed down tools. Somebody has to specialize. Plus the point is that as cars became more ubiquitous, once esoteric skills became the norm, such as checking oil, filling up gas. At some point the baseline has to advance.

> Plus the point is that as cars became more ubiquitous, once esoteric skills became the norm, such as checking oil, filling up gas. At some point the baseline has to advance.

Yes and no. On the one hand, as early cars become more common, more people had to deal with them. But on the other hand, cars became simpler to use over time.

Tinkering with your car used to be a hobby of many people and a necessity. These days, there's not much user servicing left. (I don't even know whether you still have to manually check the level of oil? Don't they have sensors for that these days?)

Gas station pumps have also become much easier to use. It requires some intention and a minimum amount of skill to overfill your tank these days. Similar considerations apply to using computers.

Starting your spreadsheet by typing something in the DOS prompt used to be how things were done. These days, vastly more people are expected to be at least somewhat familiar with spreadsheets--it's no longer something to highlight in your CV--but starting the program used to do so has become simpler.

Similar countervailing developments have been common since at least the industrial revolution. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deskilling

Re: The Distribution of Users’ Computer Skills: Worse Than You Think (2016)

#73

Post by baroffoos » Mon, Sep 23, 2019, 2:58 AM UTC

userbinator wrote: post #13

tryptophan wrote: post #6

>Instead of using live websites, the participants attempted the tasks on simulated software on the test facilitator’s computer. I wonder if this really lowered all the scores, because the test UI may have been very non-standard/outdated/etc. "Simulated software" could be literally anything and could have caused a bunch of confusion among people who are used to certain icons and usage patterns.

I wonder if this really lowered all the scores, because the test UI may have been very non-standard/outdated/etc. ...or, as may as likely be the case, very "modern". I'm confident to say that I'm far in the "advanced user" category, also having been a developer for a few decades, and yet I still get perplexed often by UIs with lots of hidden functionality and confusing hieroglyphics instead of descriptive text.

Its also interesting how much of what we consider an "easy to use UI" actually just means "Its what I already know".

I have been using linux with gnome for years and I recently had to use a macbook. I wanted to change the sound settings so I opened the global app search thing and typed "Sound" got nothing so I searched "Audio" still nothing so I tried to find the settings app and tried "Settings" still nothing until I remembered the settings app is called "Preferences"

The OSX UI is not hard to use, its just not the same as what I had been using for years so even simple interactions seem difficult.

Re: The Distribution of Users’ Computer Skills: Worse Than You Think (2016)

#74

Post by Spooky23 » Mon, Sep 23, 2019, 3:00 AM UTC

mquander wrote: post #25

It frustrates me that the takeaway of this post, and the implicit conclusion of many software designers, is "keep it extremely simple, or two thirds of the population can’t use your design." I think a better conclusion is "if these skills are important, design software which aids in and rewards the development of them." If your software is designed with some UX which is hyper-optimized to get users to do some small h…

Conclusions made by design folks are difficult for me to take seriously, because the journey mapping and design process is usually based on consensus on desired behaviors. Design isn’t science, it’s usually a process framework.

Best case it’s an 80/20 situation. Few design teams have a mandate or desire to dive into the 20%. They love to remove “distractions” and usually don’t understand that tasks that happen once a quarter are often as important as tasks that are done 3x per day.

I’ll use iMovie as an example. It’s a well-designed, great app and incredibly intuitive... if you are on a path/experience that was designed for you. My then-5 year old could make shockingly well done little movies without the ability to meaningfully read. But... if you need to step off the path, it’s a cliff.

When I was in college, in the 90s, I worked at a big box retailer selling computers and similar gear. Their ERP was an AS/400, text based system that was not at all intuitive, but with about 30 minutes of training was usable. After a few weeks was a trusty tool that could be adeptly and efficiently wielded. The difference was that it was a tool, and the practitioners of the tool could make changes to how the tools were used to get shot done.

Re: The Distribution of Users’ Computer Skills: Worse Than You Think (2016)

#75

Post by ericras » Mon, Sep 23, 2019, 3:02 AM UTC

Spivak wrote: post #57

t34543 wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’ve got 20 years in tech and I find products like Snapchat extremely difficult to use. It’s NOT intuitive at all. Is it just me, or is it terrible?

I think by most standards Snapchat’s UX would be judged pretty harshly. But it has a strong following because at its core it’s a power user app. Making features/actions discoverable takes up UI space that Snapchat almost entirely hides behind swipes or unlabeled buttons. Snapchat’s philosophy is interesting because it’s designed for people who already know how to use Snapchat. It actually increased the social aspect…

That’s a good way to describe it. It’s interesting that an anti-pattern (bad UI/UX) can be an asset like that. Snapchat is the Bloomberg Terminal for teens.

Re: The Distribution of Users’ Computer Skills: Worse Than You Think (2016)

#76

Post by scarface74 » Mon, Sep 23, 2019, 3:08 AM UTC

chongli wrote: post #41

scarface74 wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Should I also learn how to repair my car instead of just taking it to the dealer? It’s called specialization of labor. Most of us make an above average wage dealing with computers and pay other people to know things we don’t know.

I see the car analogy used regularly and I think it’s completely off base. A much better analogy for computer skills is literacy and numeracy. We don’t tell people “don’t bother learning how to read, you can listen to audio books on audible!” just as we shouldn’t tell people that computer programming is only for professional software developers (or anything else involving intensive skill mastery related to computers)…

And car mechanics would look at you just as derisively for not knowing how to fix your own car. They would also say that fixing a car isn’t just for professionals. The average person doesn’t need to know how to program any more than the average programmer needs to know assembly (I do). Everyone is ignorant to someone who doesn’t knows something that they do.

Re: The Distribution of Users’ Computer Skills: Worse Than You Think (2016)

#77

Post by scarface74 » Mon, Sep 23, 2019, 3:12 AM UTC

ryandrake wrote: post #43

scarface74 wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Should I also learn how to repair my car instead of just taking it to the dealer? It’s called specialization of labor. Most of us make an above average wage dealing with computers and pay other people to know things we don’t know.

Yes, unpopular opinion these days, but car owners should really know how to do at least the bare minimum of basic car maintenance. I'm not talking about replacing the suspension or re-building the transmission, but things like changing oil, brake pads, and refilling washer fluid. The very basic basics. Not only does it save you money (who wants to have a mechanic do something for $200 that you can do for $30 + a litt…

There are a lot of things I could save money on, but I make a good living developing software so I can pay other people to fix my car, press my clothes, mow my lawn, etc. I work during the week, money gets deposited in my account so I can enjoy the weekend doing things I want. We even spend extra going to restaurants so we don’t have to cook!

Re: The Distribution of Users’ Computer Skills: Worse Than You Think (2016)

#78

Post by throwaway413 » Mon, Sep 23, 2019, 3:15 AM UTC

taneq wrote: post #29

userbinator wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I wonder if this really lowered all the scores, because the test UI may have been very non-standard/outdated/etc. ...or, as may as likely be the case, very "modern". I'm confident to say that I'm far in the "advanced user" category, also having been a developer for a few decades, and yet I still get perplexed often by UIs with lots of hidden functionality and confusing hieroglyphics instead of descriptive text.

I find touchscreen UIs to be particularly bad at this. Icons only have meaning if they're familiar, and beyond simple point, drag, tap and pinch, touchscreens have devolved into an often-arbitrary muddle of secret handshakes. Example (as a recent iPhone user): If I want to open an SMS from the lock screen notification I swipe right, if I want to clear or respond to the notification I swipe left then select from the o…

> but double-tapping the same button without triggering the physical button gets you some empty tray thing at the top of the screen which I'm still not sure the function of (maybe makes it easier to swipe down and get to notifications?)

This is correct. Soft double tapping the home button cuts the display window in half, to make it easier to operate one-handed.

Re: The Distribution of Users’ Computer Skills: Worse Than You Think (2016)

#79

Post by scarface74 » Mon, Sep 23, 2019, 3:16 AM UTC

ryandrake wrote: post #67

sneak wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Brake pads are not “the very basics”; they require owning a set of tools.

I don't think having a jack stand and a 40x10x10cm toolbox squirreled away in a closet is that big of a hurdle. The tools required for all the examples I mentioned are extremely minimal, and the skills can be picked up by watching 10 minutes of YouTube.

Or I can, drop my car off on the way to work, take the shuttle to work, take Uber home, or bring my laptop with me and earn my living doing what I’ve done for 30 years and pay someone else to do it...

Re: The Distribution of Users’ Computer Skills: Worse Than You Think (2016)

#80

Post by Zircom » Mon, Sep 23, 2019, 3:18 AM UTC

Spivak wrote: post #57

t34543 wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’ve got 20 years in tech and I find products like Snapchat extremely difficult to use. It’s NOT intuitive at all. Is it just me, or is it terrible?

I think by most standards Snapchat’s UX would be judged pretty harshly. But it has a strong following because at its core it’s a power user app. Making features/actions discoverable takes up UI space that Snapchat almost entirely hides behind swipes or unlabeled buttons. Snapchat’s philosophy is interesting because it’s designed for people who already know how to use Snapchat. It actually increased the social aspect…

>Snapchat’s philosophy is interesting because it’s designed for people who already know how to use Snapchat. It actually increased the social aspect a bit because most everyone probably has a story or two of being shown how to do something by someone else.

Very true. Just last night a person I've been on a few dates with showed me that they apparently added multiplayer games to snapchat quite awhile ago and I had no idea they existed til then.