Golf Apps
in [Golf]
|
Prev: 59 with an asterisk?
Next: Golf as a sport article
From: dene on 5 Aug 2010 17:37 "Alan Baker" <alangbaker(a)telus.net> wrote in message news:alangbaker-70A609.14142005082010(a)news.shawcable.com... > In article <8c0nh8FlpkU1(a)mid.individual.net>, > "dene" <dene(a)remove.ipns.com> wrote: > > > <bknight(a)conramp.net> wrote in message > > news:588m56tucn1drtaf85sk167oqh7m96a0oh(a)4ax.com... > > > > > If you want to keep things on a friendly level then you > > > won't even reply. > > > > > > BK > > > > Good luck with that! ;) > > > > -Greg > > So why does it have to be me that doesn't reply to keep it on a friendly > level, Greg. Why couldn't Bobby have simply refrained from writing that > post entirely? Why do you require the last word? -Greg
From: Alan Baker on 5 Aug 2010 17:41 In article <8c0oakFqmfU1(a)mid.individual.net>, "dene" <dene(a)remove.ipns.com> wrote: > "Alan Baker" <alangbaker(a)telus.net> wrote in message > news:alangbaker-95F4C6.13444405082010(a)news.shawcable.com... > > In article <8c0lugFcghU1(a)mid.individual.net>, > > "dene" <dene(a)remove.ipns.com> wrote: > > > > > "Alan Baker" <alangbaker(a)telus.net> wrote in message > > > news:alangbaker-602B48.13234205082010(a)news.shawcable.com... > > > > In article <8c0jv4FvmuU1(a)mid.individual.net>, > > > > "dene" <dene(a)remove.ipns.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > Explain my satisfaction with my 8 year old Dell desktop. I haven't > seen > > > a > > > > > blue screen in years. Others are saying the same thing. You're > caught > > > up > > > > > in your ego and limited paradigm. > > > > > > > > Your satisfaction is built on not knowing it can be better. I'm sorry, > > > > but the odds are nearly 100% that this is the case. You talk about the > > > > bias of people who spend more money buying a Mac forcing them to > believe > > > > it's better. > > > > > > There is no way to improve my experience. I turn on OE...it works. I > turn > > > on my Firefox browser...it works. Same with the business applications. > All > > > of them work beautifully. The only reasons I will change is to take > > > advantage of a larger HD, memory, and co-processor speed. But....the > > > stability of this platform cannot be improved....just duplicated. > > > > > > Given this, why would I want to waste hours learning another OS and the > > > software associated with it. > > > > Oh come on, Greg... > > > > Even you don't believe what you just said. It was the semantic > > equivalent of saying "my computer is perfect", that should you update > > the OS or application, there will be not a single thing where you can > > say "Hey! This works better than it did in the old version". > > > > Is that really what you want to go with? > > Yes....because it is my experience! I drive older cars, not because I can't > afford the new models, but because the older car gets me down the road just > fine. I have a '92 ski boat which is in excellent shape and will haul the > kids all over a lake next week, as it has since 1994 when I bought it. To > hear you talk, I should have 2010 model with all the bells and whistles. > But in reality....both will haul a wakeboarder equally. But you'd never say that makes an old car as good as a new car. You may be willing to live with the limitations of it, but that's not the same. What I'm saying is that there are parts of your experience of using a Windows system that you are so used to, you don't see them as problems or even impediments, but that's because we tend to get used to such things over time and dismiss them from our minds. I'm not saying that you or Bobby are stupid or unobservant; just that you are like other people. There is a tremendous book that talks a lot about the phenomenon: "The Design of Everyday Things". It articulates what I'm trying to get at much better than I'm obviously doing it, but one of the things this guy found was that people tend to completely gloss over ways in which a product, or tool, or computer system forces them to work in a manner than is less than optimal and just assume that it had to be that way for some reason and therefore it is up to them to adjust. Example: The author was brought in to a company who made dedicated word processing stations back in the day to do a consultation on the usability of their latest system. Almost immediately upon using it, he noticed that it was possible to lose all of one's unsaved work by the simple confusion of one keyboard shortcut with another. When he brought it up to the development team, they couldn't see it. They were so used to the concepts that they never made the error and they insisted that wouldn't be a problem for anyone else, because they had the new machine in use in the secretarial pool and none of the users there had mentioned it. When the author (Donald A. Norman, BTW) checked with the secretarial pool, he discovered that they were actually making the error regularly, but had assumed that the problem was with them and they had only been asked to report problems with the system. I trust you see what I'm getting at here. > > The concept I'm describing is called....satisfaction. "Latest and greatest" > usually means zero balance in the savings account. That's another topic entirely. But what you're not allowing for is the possibility that there might be more satisfaction in something else, even if it does cost more. > > This is what I'm trying to teach my son, who has champagne taste on a beer > salary. Why not buy a $500 laptop and save the difference? Because you do get things for your money. You really do get a system that is easier to use. Because the difference in prices works out to about $0.64/day over a three year lifetime. Can you at least admit the possibility that one system might enjoy a less than a dollar advantage in overall productivity than another system? Because after three years, the Mac can be resold for a much higher price than the $500 laptop you suggest should be purchased instead; making the actual difference in cost even less. There are three reasons. > > The only thing I deliberately buy new is underwear. Fine, but it's not like there aren't used Macs that one can buy too... :-) -- Alan Baker Vancouver, British Columbia <http://gallery.me.com/alangbaker/100008/DSCF0162/web.jpg>
From: Alan Baker on 5 Aug 2010 17:50 In article <8c0ov6FuafU1(a)mid.individual.net>, "dene" <dene(a)remove.ipns.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > The idea under consideration here is your assertion that know > one > > > can > > > > > > > > know more about what you need because they cannot read your > mind > > > and > > > > > > > > there are clearly lots of instances where humans are not the > best > > > > > judge > > > > > > > > of what it is they need. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > But you, of course, are judge and jury as to what a computer > user > > > > > requires. > > > > > > > > > > > > Nope. Nothing so grand. I'm a personal computer support > professional > > > who > > > > > > has spent more than twenty years, using, selling and supporting > > > personal > > > > > > computers and personal computer users. As such, I've learned that > what > > > > > > people think is going on and what is actually going on with their > use > > > of > > > > > > computers differs widely. > > > > > > > > > > Really. Tell me. In your vast experience, have you ever told a PC > user > > > > > that he should stick with a PC? > > > > > > > > Yes. > > > > > > Why....and how often?? > > > > Not very often. See: honesty. You should try it. ;-) > > Pfft. You are being honest about your bias, that's all. When I consult > with a client, I tell them that all the companies I represent do a good job. > It becomes a question of what they need and can afford. That's what honest > brokers do. My job is primarily to support users who already have systems, so what they are using is usually pre-determined. As for my biases, they are the result of more than twenty years experience in the personal computer business. > > > > > > > I'm not making this stuff up, Greg: people *literally* say that > they > > > > > > couldn't get why it would make such a difference, but that they > were > > > > > > completely wrong and it *does*. I've seen it over and over and > over > > > > > > again. > > > > > > > > > > Yes. Diesel guys say this about the gassers and vice versa. There > are > > > > > people who prefer/ridicule rag boats. Others prefer power. 8 track > vs. > > > > > cassette. Dems vs. GOP. Chevy vs. Ford. The list goes on and on. > > > > > > > > It does. But it doesn't mean that it is always irrelevant. > > > > > > The testimonials are not irrelevent. But....they need to be ascertained > > > within context. Humans are ingrained with a natural tendency to believe > > > that their views, their race, their country, their stuff is superior to > > > others. Some realize this and become open to other POV's and > experience. > > > Other's remain closed, deluding themselves with their "superior" > > > intelligence and experience. > > > > I agree. And the experience of a long-time Windows user has to be > > considered within the context that they to have an investment (in time) > > in the system they've chosen. > > Halleluah! Is that "Hallelujah!" and admission that your own investment in time might bias your opinions? > > > But what I've noticed is that people who've switched to the Mac tend to > > rave about it and very, very rarely switch back, whereas people who > > switch to Windows *never* rave about, and switch back much more often. > > > > That's voting with their actions. > > But there are so few converts, aren't there. To hear you talk, MS will be > out of business in a year or two. Yes, there are relatively few converts. Because there are lots of people such as you and Bobby, who don't get that it could be better than the experience you're getting now. > > > > > > > > Ever consider this factor with your "testimonials?" Most people > put > > > > > thought > > > > > > > into large dollar purchases. Therefore, if they choose a Mac > and > > > then > > > > > > > determine it's equivalent or slightly superior to a PC, are they > > > going > > > > > to > > > > > > > admit it? Quietly perhaps. That leaves the loud ones who > require > > > > > > > affirmation. They will tout their purchase to the nth degree, > just > > > to > > > > > > > stroke their own ego and diminish their nagging doubts. I've > seen > > > it > > > > > happen > > > > > > > with cars, boats, golf clubs, etc. My toy is better than yours, > > > only > > > > > > > because I own it. > > > > > > > > > > > > There is undoubtedly some of that, but look at the preponderance > of > > > > > > people who report after the switch that the Mac *is* that much > better > > > > > > than using Windows. > > > > > > I dispute the "much better." To hear you wax on, you'd have us believe > that > > > a PC is a Yugo, while you, the enlightened one, are driving an Accura. > > > > > > In the real world, it's Chevy vs. Ford, with variable needs, mileage, > and > > > experience. If PC's were Yugos, MS would have been bankrupted years > ago. > > > Consumers are not stupid. > > > > PCs aren't Yugos, but they aren't Lexuses either. > > > > And come on: "Consumers are not stupid"? Really? > > > > Fact is: *lots* of consumers *are* stupid. > > Elitism defined. No. Reality clearly stated. In another context you'd have no problem at all agreeing with that statement. > > > > > > Of course they do. Are they going to chuck their $1200 Mac into the > can > > > and > > > > > revert back to a PC? No....they will adapt and affirm their > purchase. > > > A > > > > > few become McSnobs. > > > > > > > > You just completely ignored what I said. > > > > > > I put it in context.... > > > > No. You reverted to what you said before I added my additional > > information. > > > > > > > > > > > So he tried it for a month, and then went out and spent the money. > > > > > > > > > > But in your "world", nobody tries a Mac for a month and decide > > > otherwise. > > > > > > > > Not nobody. Very few. He tried it for a month, and then bought one to > > > > make the switch permanent. > > > > > > > > > Wait a second. BK and Mike have tried Macs.....but their ignorant > > > > > experience don't count, do they?? > > > > > > > > Both say they've tried them for a few minutes at a time. Not for a > month. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dem Dumbasses! > > > > > > That is not what they said. > > > > In the case of Mike, it most certainly is, and Bobby hasn't said > > anything other than that he tried the Mac a few times at the insistence > > of friends. How long is that likely to have been? > > Their trial and experience was sufficient to conclude that changing > platforms isn't cost or time effective for them. I have zero doubts that I > would have the same conclusion. Reason....I'm happy...satisfied....with my > PC's. No, it's not. But the trouble is that it's difficult to get an adequate trial. Spending a few minutes with the Mac is not going to illuminate like using it day to day for a couple of weeks, but finding a way to do that is difficult for most people. They have to go out on a limb. But what I've found is that very few who try it ever decide it was the wrong idea. > > > > > > > And read the comments. I could literally spend the next couple of > > > hours > > > > > > copying and pasting, but here are a few right off the top. > > > > > > > > > > The point is that you could post testimonies about Hyundai and > Chevy's > > > and > > > > > Renaults. It still doesn't mean, in of themselves, that a > particular > > > > > product is more suitable than another. > > > > > > > > It might on an open website where you can hardly find a dissenting > > > > comment. > > > > > > > > This wasn't testimonials on a Mac forum, Greg. > > > > > > Context and paradigm, Alan. I appreciate that you are actually making a > > > stand on something instead of your nit picking trolling M.O., but you > need > > > to get off your high horse. > > > > I'm not on a high horse, Greg. I'm telling you what I've found in many > > years of working in this area. > > And this experience has caused you to delude yourself that your view is more > enlightened than others. Is your view on insurance more enlightened than the layman's view, Greg. > > Ya know Alan. Some people just like plain old vanilla ice cream. Deal with > it. It's funny you should mention ice cream. It was in a Baskin-Robbins ice cream store that I first saw this quote: "There is hardly anything in the world that someone cannot make a little worse and sell a little cheaper, and the people who consider price alone are that person's lawful prey." -John Ruskin -- Alan Baker Vancouver, British Columbia <http://gallery.me.com/alangbaker/100008/DSCF0162/web.jpg>
From: Alan Baker on 5 Aug 2010 17:51 In article <8c0p0uFukeU1(a)mid.individual.net>, "dene" <dene(a)remove.ipns.com> wrote: > "Alan Baker" <alangbaker(a)telus.net> wrote in message > news:alangbaker-70A609.14142005082010(a)news.shawcable.com... > > In article <8c0nh8FlpkU1(a)mid.individual.net>, > > "dene" <dene(a)remove.ipns.com> wrote: > > > > > <bknight(a)conramp.net> wrote in message > > > news:588m56tucn1drtaf85sk167oqh7m96a0oh(a)4ax.com... > > > > > > > If you want to keep things on a friendly level then you > > > > won't even reply. > > > > > > > > BK > > > > > > Good luck with that! ;) > > > > > > -Greg > > > > So why does it have to be me that doesn't reply to keep it on a friendly > > level, Greg. Why couldn't Bobby have simply refrained from writing that > > post entirely? > > Why do you require the last word? > > -Greg I don't. That's not what I'm asking. What I want to know is why replying is such an evil for me, but not for Bobby. -- Alan Baker Vancouver, British Columbia <http://gallery.me.com/alangbaker/100008/DSCF0162/web.jpg>
From: dene on 5 Aug 2010 18:08
"Alan Baker" <alangbaker(a)telus.net> wrote in message news:alangbaker-D26C80.14415005082010(a)news.shawcable.com... > In article <8c0oakFqmfU1(a)mid.individual.net>, > "dene" <dene(a)remove.ipns.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > There is no way to improve my experience. I turn on OE...it works. I > > turn > > > > on my Firefox browser...it works. Same with the business applications. > > All > > > > of them work beautifully. The only reasons I will change is to take > > > > advantage of a larger HD, memory, and co-processor speed. But....the > > > > stability of this platform cannot be improved....just duplicated. > > > > > > > > Given this, why would I want to waste hours learning another OS and the > > > > software associated with it. > > > > > > Oh come on, Greg... > > > > > > Even you don't believe what you just said. It was the semantic > > > equivalent of saying "my computer is perfect", that should you update > > > the OS or application, there will be not a single thing where you can > > > say "Hey! This works better than it did in the old version". > > > > > > Is that really what you want to go with? > > > > Yes....because it is my experience! I drive older cars, not because I can't > > afford the new models, but because the older car gets me down the road just > > fine. I have a '92 ski boat which is in excellent shape and will haul the > > kids all over a lake next week, as it has since 1994 when I bought it. To > > hear you talk, I should have 2010 model with all the bells and whistles. > > But in reality....both will haul a wakeboarder equally. > > But you'd never say that makes an old car as good as a new car. You may > be willing to live with the limitations of it, but that's not the same. Bang for buck. Given this criteria, I would easily argue that the old car and boat is superior to the new. > What I'm saying is that there are parts of your experience of using a > Windows system that you are so used to, you don't see them as problems > or even impediments, but that's because we tend to get used to such > things over time and dismiss them from our minds. I'm not saying that > you or Bobby are stupid or unobservant; just that you are like other > people. > > There is a tremendous book that talks a lot about the phenomenon: "The > Design of Everyday Things". It articulates what I'm trying to get at > much better than I'm obviously doing it, but one of the things this guy > found was that people tend to completely gloss over ways in which a > product, or tool, or computer system forces them to work in a manner > than is less than optimal and just assume that it had to be that way for > some reason and therefore it is up to them to adjust. Example: > > The author was brought in to a company who made dedicated word > processing stations back in the day to do a consultation on the > usability of their latest system. Almost immediately upon using it, he > noticed that it was possible to lose all of one's unsaved work by the > simple confusion of one keyboard shortcut with another. When he brought > it up to the development team, they couldn't see it. They were so used > to the concepts that they never made the error and they insisted that > wouldn't be a problem for anyone else, because they had the new machine > in use in the secretarial pool and none of the users there had mentioned > it. When the author (Donald A. Norman, BTW) checked with the secretarial > pool, he discovered that they were actually making the error regularly, > but had assumed that the problem was with them and they had only been > asked to report problems with the system. > > I trust you see what I'm getting at here. I see your point. When there is actual advancement, then it's worth it to me and the typical consumer to upgrade. I never bought or used Win.3. I liked DOS and thought Win was garbage. But when Win 95 came out, I converted. The upgrade was warranted due to the leaps in technology. The same applies your WP example. I used to use Word Perfect exclusively until a vastly superior product was introduced. There is not a serious leap in advancement with Mac vs. PC....certainly not one that is worth the investment in time and money. Perhaps someday....but not today. > > The concept I'm describing is called....satisfaction. "Latest and greatest" > > usually means zero balance in the savings account. > > That's another topic entirely. But what you're not allowing for is the > possibility that there might be more satisfaction in something else, > even if it does cost more. Yes....if the level of advancement warrants it. > > This is what I'm trying to teach my son, who has champagne taste on a beer > > salary. Why not buy a $500 laptop and save the difference? > > Because you do get things for your money. You really do get a system > that is easier to use. Easier? Because it loads something a second faster? > Because the difference in prices works out to about $0.64/day over a > three year lifetime. Can you at least admit the possibility that one > system might enjoy a less than a dollar advantage in overall > productivity than another system? > > Because after three years, the Mac can be resold for a much higher price > than the $500 laptop you suggest should be purchased instead; making the > actual difference in cost even less. I buy used. I'm not one to sell used. I usually donate. > There are three reasons. > > > > > The only thing I deliberately buy new is underwear. > > Fine, but it's not like there aren't used Macs that one can buy too... > > :-) Yeah....I wish the kid would consider that. Even better, I wish he'd be satisfied with a one to two year old, $300 laptop. That's what I buy and they have served me well. -Greg |