Live data from Hacker News

Why PowerPoint should be banned

washingtonpost.com

201–210 of 215 posts

Re: Why PowerPoint should be banned

#201
post #91
post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If we're to use logic, how about use it properly? For one, food is essential for our survival. Powerpoint is not. So while banning food would be nonsensical (for that reason), banning Powerpoint doesn't have the same issue. A better example would be: "French fries make us fat, ban french fries". Not as nonsensical. French fries are not essential to eat in the first place, and cause harm according to most studies.

>For one, food is essential for our survival. The analogy isn't based on 'essentiality'. The point that was made, was correct - Banning something does not solve the original problem. Sorry for spelling it out. I didn't realize comprehending it would be so troublesome for some. There is no such thing as a perfect analogy. If an analogy can't break down, it wouldn't be called an analogy. You would just say the thing th…

>The point that was made, was correct - Banning something does not solve the original problem

That point might have been correct, but it wasn't the one made.

If the analogy wasn't intented to be based on "essentiality" then picking something undeniably essential (and pointing that it's "nonsensical" to ban it because of some problem it causes) was the wrong choice.

But actually the point wasn't even correct. The correct point would be rather: "Banning something does not solve the original problem in _some_ cases". For there are many cases were banning something does solve the original problem. It might not solve it 100%, but it does solve it to a satisfying degree. That's the core idea behind the law banning things actually, and has worked for millenia.

>There is no such thing as a perfect analogy.

No, but there are such things as badly formulated analogies.

Re: Why PowerPoint should be banned

#202

Even if you did ban PowerPoint, people would just find a way to do PP-like things with something else. For example, MS Word, with the page down key (although then the transition animations go away, so that is a minor victory). In my opinion, people are just poorly educated (or not educated) in presentation making. Or to phase it another way, a school may teach them to use PP the software but doesn't teach them how to…

I agree with you but there is another thing people sometimes forget. If the material is for a training course or similar people wants something to take home afterwards but that should probably be some kind of documentation instead of a Powerpoint presentation. When it is the same document one might get tempted to write too many slides with too much text on them.

Re: Why PowerPoint should be banned

#203
post #146

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's so that you can send the slide deck out and people have the actual presentation when they see the slides. I hate when I go somewhere and they provided just the slides of a previous talk and the slides have no real information on them, there is no context or explanation as to what the bulleted points are talking about. Not to say that the talk verbatim in the presentation is a good idea either, but people seem to…

And very few people watch full-length 45 min. videos of presentations even when they're made. Views drop off after 3-5 mins. At the risk of being obnoxious, the slide deck should be whatever the presenter feels best supports their presentation in front of the audience. At a conference, that should be the overriding goal of the slides. They shouldn't be designed to provide background/context/explanation for someone wh…

I think some slide notes could be created even if it takes some extra time. Some viewers might be there to learn and wants some notes/references while others are there for entertainment. If everyone is forced to take their own notes it might take attention away from the presentation itself.

Re: Why PowerPoint should be banned

#204
post #174
post #77

I work in consulting; I have seen my fair share of badly-drawn graphics and spend more time using PowerPoint than I would care to admit. The reality is that for most of Corporate America banning PowerPoint is not going to happen anytime soon. In our industry, decks are viewed not just as presentations but general fodder for deliverables, handouts, etc. I've been on several engagements where we intentionally jam-packe…

Yeah, keynote/"compelling conference content" presentations are very different animals. Even if some would prefer my presentations of the former type stood on their own better, my focus there is on the live experience. If you're presenting the findings of a consulting project? Not so much. In that case, the charts and graphics should be professional and clean but also focus on data/recommendations/etc. Very different…

The question is: Why use Powerpoint to present the findings of a consulting project? Handout-only would probably be superior. Amazon does it like this.

http://conorneill.com/2012/11/30/amazon-staff-meetings-no-po...

Re: Why PowerPoint should be banned

#205
post #200

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't understand "low resolution" Frankly, PPT has as much resolution as you need. The question really is, "what resolution makes the best sense?" Up-thread, somebody mentioned paper handouts being distributed just before the talk. That's a great idea, and it can mitigate some of the resolution perception issues, and or help when using higher fidelity isn't so appropriate. But not all PPT presentations actually are…

By low-res, Tufte is referring to the concept of stacking information in time , rather than placing it adjacent in space . (this is all his insight, not mine) It's "low res" in the same way a phone voice-mail menu is low-res "press 1 for x, press 2 for y, press 3 for z, etc" . You get bits of information sequentially, stacked in time. The onus is on you, the receiver, to piece the information together into some sort…

That's the thing. If you want to put full sentences, even paragraphs on a slide, PPT does that.

It's only low resolution when used that way.

I do understand "wants to be low res" though. Thanks!

Re: Why PowerPoint should be banned

#206

Even if you did ban PowerPoint, people would just find a way to do PP-like things with something else. For example, MS Word, with the page down key (although then the transition animations go away, so that is a minor victory). In my opinion, people are just poorly educated (or not educated) in presentation making. Or to phase it another way, a school may teach them to use PP the software but doesn't teach them how to…

I remember in college I was marked off for not putting everything I said in my presentation into the powerpoint verbatim. I knew the professor was being dumb, but I just took the grade and moved on. I wonder how many kids in the class actually took her advice.

At my school we were marked down if we put more than X words on a slide (The rule was if you can't read the entire slide on a projector across the room, you have too much text), everything else should be in the slide notes.

Re: Why PowerPoint should be banned

#207
post #146

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And very few people watch full-length 45 min. videos of presentations even when they're made. Views drop off after 3-5 mins. At the risk of being obnoxious, the slide deck should be whatever the presenter feels best supports their presentation in front of the audience. At a conference, that should be the overriding goal of the slides. They shouldn't be designed to provide background/context/explanation for someone wh…

I think some slide notes could be created even if it takes some extra time. Some viewers might be there to learn and wants some notes/references while others are there for entertainment. If everyone is forced to take their own notes it might take attention away from the presentation itself.

I find that notes are a natural result of preparing a talk. I write the notes to work out what I plan to say while designing the slides to support the script. The notes are the main way to communicate with people who weren't there or who need a reminder of what was said or to follow up references.

Example: https://git.csx.cam.ac.uk/x/ucs/u/fanf2/talks/2014-03-nws42....

Re: Why PowerPoint should be banned

#208
post #124

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Except it's difficult/impossible to edit a PDF file. How would you handle the use-case where multiple authors are collaborating on a single powerpoint file? You generate your PDF presentation from LaTeX, which is stored in git! Multiple simultaneous editors with sane merging, unlike a group of people editing a PPT file on the network drive. But those are probably not the PDF presenters you're talking about.

So you're really talking bout LaTeX, not PDF then. PDF is a publishing format, not a collaboration format. Now you run into the WYSIWYG issue, where the collaboration format needs to be "printed" in order to see the output. Is there a WYSIWIG collaboration tool for LaTeX over git?

Sure. But if we're talking about using a PDF as "slides" like bhartzer mentioned, it's always going to be made somewhere else and published. Unless they draw the entire thing out of annotations in Acrobat.

Which I can now imagine someone doing. Gross.

Re: Why PowerPoint should be banned

#209
post #136

Disclaimer: I work at Microsoft, on PowerPoint. Here are a few of my reactions (mine alone, not Microsoft's): * Presenting an idea is one of the most subtle arts of the human experience. It draws on skills like storytelling, communication, and persuasion which are way outside the scope of any software application. The best typewriter in the world is going to let Ernest Hemingway's Great American Novel flow directly f…

As a person who has made a living with MS Office products throughout the B2B sales cycle, I am fundamentally grateful for the tools created. PowerPoint is extremely powerful. Unfortunately, the one thing it "needs" the ability to do - train people how to use it effectively - isn't really a core competency. Practically speaking, I don't think instruction on how to use PowerPoint is genuinely possible, insofar as different business and cultural applications will have varying approaches and implementations.

The only thing that bothers me about PowerPoint, on a personal/professional level, is that it is so easy to use. Any semi-literate person with an ojbective and enough time on their hands can realistically create a deck. In a lot of ways, I see PowerPoint and Garageband as similar in this regard - sure, the software can help "make" a presentation or song, but will it be any good for an audience?

Basically, I think your first point is spot-on, and should be used as a buffer from undue criticism. In my professional experience, I've seen far too many "experts" in their fields try to tell me, the "presentation expert" what to do, how to do it, and be stupidly stubborn in fighting the collaborative process. To put it another way, many professionals talk trash about a liberal arts degree (such as creative writing) or the pursuit of experience in live performance (such as drama or comedy in front of audiences) until they realize that the highest stakes business situations are simply concentrated, higher pressure versions of those types of performances. It takes quite a while for a professional to get to a point in their career whereby they might have this epiphany, and those who do "get it" rise to the top in competitve opportunities. They understand the art of presentation, and they embrace guidance and support from artists (wordsmiths, graphic designers, etc) to achieve their vision.

My thesis topic for a Masters in Education (Curriculum Design) focused on the balance of technological tools versus internal intellectual development. Somewhat akin to the hypothesis of "If I have this ubiquitious computer program that will correct my spelling / grammar for me, do I really need to know how to write well in the first place? No!" From what I found in research / studies, yes, that appears to be the trend.

PowerPoint unfortunately allows its users to fall into the same trap, insofar as people can fire up the program, get started, and plow through to their objective ("create a presentation") without the due diligence to plan, structure, and consider their audience's expectations and attention span. That's not the software's fault...well, maybe in some respects because it doesn't have the hard learning curve to keep it out of the hands of those who shouldn't be diddling with it (Garageband vs. Ableton Live is a reasonable comparison), but there's nothing inherently bad about PowerPoint. Nope, it's a good piece of kit. The idiots that use it on the other hand? Yeah, software can't fix them, nope, no way, no how...

Now, if you'll excuse me, I have to go back to deleting 17 extra Master Slides, adjusting page numbers so they all align, re-pasting graphics from Excel as Enhanced Metafiles instead of JPGs, fixing the header font size to be consistent, and wondering what kind of demon decided to change the font from Arial to Calibri in random places! (Not really, but been there, done that, got the T-shirt)

Re: Why PowerPoint should be banned

#210
post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If we're to use logic, how about use it properly? For one, food is essential for our survival. Powerpoint is not. So while banning food would be nonsensical (for that reason), banning Powerpoint doesn't have the same issue. A better example would be: "French fries make us fat, ban french fries". Not as nonsensical. French fries are not essential to eat in the first place, and cause harm according to most studies.

And thus, after banning french fries, the world was less fat. I think you made GP's point better than he did. Banning the medium and hoping that fixes the root issue is a bit foolish. Not to say banning the medium isn't always a bad idea, but doesn't mean it'll help.

>And thus, after banning french fries, the world was less fat.

Well, maybe not french frieds, but HFCS sure.

Post reply on HN