Comment Re:Too many choices?? Hardly (Score 1) 537
These sound like poor analogies and FUD, to me.
Each "choice domain" is going to have varying characteristics that will make a decision process easy or difficult. These car and meat examples happen to be ones where the information available and past experience, not to mention the driving purpose of the purchase (no pun intended) such as wanting an off-roading vehicle versus a commute vehicle or throwing a BBQ versus gourmet dinner, will undoubtedly make the decision process easier.
Getting back to computers, let's take web browsers for example. There are several web browsers in existance today, each varying by several characteristics:
-support for web standards
-support for tabbed browsing
-support for skins
-anti-aliased text
-intuitive bookmark management
-support for ad blocking
-support for pop-up blocking
-support for extentions and plug-ins
How many browsers does Windows come with by default? One.
How many browsers does Mac OS X come with by default? One.
How many browsers do I have on my Windows machine at work? Two.
How many browsers do I have on my Mac OS X machine at home? Four.
Just because only one choice is available initially doesn't mean it's a static situation. These systems are set up so that out of the box, the user isn't required to make a choice. There is an inherent trust that is assumed that when you buy one of these systems, the manufacturer has set up the system in a way that will be adequate for your needs. It is also assumed that those whose needs are not met will seek out ways to meet those needs, i.e. via looking for alternatives or developing their own.
"Freedom to choose" doesn't have to mean "forced to choose".
You might argue that with Linux systems, having multiple word processing suites pre-loaded and available in the menus, for example, might make the decision process easier. However, by doing that, you're immediately forcing a decision on the user that they might not be ready to make without a better understanding of their personal needs and what each suite offers. The former can only come with experience. The latter can be addressed by providing the user with enough information to be able to make an informed decision and the means to act on their decision (e.g. a web site, package management system, etc.).
Presenting decision-making information is an artform in itself, as there are so many factors that are involved. For example, what's the best format to present the information (text, stylized text, graphics, multi-media), which information should be presented (will anyone care about feature a, will anyone be offended by mentioning feature b, will feature c be attractive enough to plunk down x dollars), and how/when should it be presented (printed documentation, online documentation, set-up wizard, tool tips, demo software, in-person demo, magazine articles, etc.)
I think this is where the real challenge (and potential pay-off) lies... in shaping the decision making process of others. Of course, this applies to more than just computers. We all do this on a daily basis, and the media, governments and corporations are all just extensions of ourselves. When put in a position to shape the decision making process of others, our different goals and motivations will also have an effect on what options are presented... sometimes so much so that the options presented are not necessarily the best for the decision maker, whether they know it or not (I like to call this the "illusion of choice").
For example, consider the cola wars. Coke vs. Pepsi: Which is better? The question is framed with the implied assumption: you want a cola and nothing else will do. No alternatives are even considered. Perhaps a glass of cold water would be just as refreshing and much more healthy but is never suggested as an option because it was previously thought it was difficult to make a profit selling water... until it was bottled, a brand identity building and marketting team was be put behind it, and a purity "choice" was fabricated to distinguish it from "other" water.
It's true, there are an overwhelming number of choices available for any aspect of our lives and only so much time and resources to devote to each one. We all choose what is most important to focus our attention toward with the hope that it will lead to a Good Life (tm), balancing trust with critical examination for each situation. Those that do it well tend to prosper, those that don't... don't.
Each "choice domain" is going to have varying characteristics that will make a decision process easy or difficult. These car and meat examples happen to be ones where the information available and past experience, not to mention the driving purpose of the purchase (no pun intended) such as wanting an off-roading vehicle versus a commute vehicle or throwing a BBQ versus gourmet dinner, will undoubtedly make the decision process easier.
Getting back to computers, let's take web browsers for example. There are several web browsers in existance today, each varying by several characteristics:
-support for web standards
-support for tabbed browsing
-support for skins
-anti-aliased text
-intuitive bookmark management
-support for ad blocking
-support for pop-up blocking
-support for extentions and plug-ins
How many browsers does Windows come with by default? One.
How many browsers does Mac OS X come with by default? One.
How many browsers do I have on my Windows machine at work? Two.
How many browsers do I have on my Mac OS X machine at home? Four.
Just because only one choice is available initially doesn't mean it's a static situation. These systems are set up so that out of the box, the user isn't required to make a choice. There is an inherent trust that is assumed that when you buy one of these systems, the manufacturer has set up the system in a way that will be adequate for your needs. It is also assumed that those whose needs are not met will seek out ways to meet those needs, i.e. via looking for alternatives or developing their own.
"Freedom to choose" doesn't have to mean "forced to choose".
You might argue that with Linux systems, having multiple word processing suites pre-loaded and available in the menus, for example, might make the decision process easier. However, by doing that, you're immediately forcing a decision on the user that they might not be ready to make without a better understanding of their personal needs and what each suite offers. The former can only come with experience. The latter can be addressed by providing the user with enough information to be able to make an informed decision and the means to act on their decision (e.g. a web site, package management system, etc.).
Presenting decision-making information is an artform in itself, as there are so many factors that are involved. For example, what's the best format to present the information (text, stylized text, graphics, multi-media), which information should be presented (will anyone care about feature a, will anyone be offended by mentioning feature b, will feature c be attractive enough to plunk down x dollars), and how/when should it be presented (printed documentation, online documentation, set-up wizard, tool tips, demo software, in-person demo, magazine articles, etc.)
I think this is where the real challenge (and potential pay-off) lies... in shaping the decision making process of others. Of course, this applies to more than just computers. We all do this on a daily basis, and the media, governments and corporations are all just extensions of ourselves. When put in a position to shape the decision making process of others, our different goals and motivations will also have an effect on what options are presented... sometimes so much so that the options presented are not necessarily the best for the decision maker, whether they know it or not (I like to call this the "illusion of choice").
For example, consider the cola wars. Coke vs. Pepsi: Which is better? The question is framed with the implied assumption: you want a cola and nothing else will do. No alternatives are even considered. Perhaps a glass of cold water would be just as refreshing and much more healthy but is never suggested as an option because it was previously thought it was difficult to make a profit selling water... until it was bottled, a brand identity building and marketting team was be put behind it, and a purity "choice" was fabricated to distinguish it from "other" water.
It's true, there are an overwhelming number of choices available for any aspect of our lives and only so much time and resources to devote to each one. We all choose what is most important to focus our attention toward with the hope that it will lead to a Good Life (tm), balancing trust with critical examination for each situation. Those that do it well tend to prosper, those that don't... don't.
