Originally posted by johnmflores I remember plenty of people loving the colored iMacs because they weren't intimidating, because they weren't designed for the "nerds" that were proud of the arcane knowledge needed to master a computer at the time
You are confusing two points: the look of a computer and how intimidating it is to use. Back when I was instructing complete newbies in computer use, we put the computer under the desk so no-one had to look at it at all (we couldn't with early model, but later). That gets rid of the factor of aesthetics completely. Then it's just down to how nice we can make the screen look, which meant staying away from amber or green displays, even if it meant paying more. (Yes, I do go back!) Third thing was interface design which I paid a lot of attention to, even in DOS days. Fourth was one-on-one instruction in a gentle manner.
Originally posted by johnmflores The brilliance of Apple was in realizing that there was a large group of people that didn't want to become computer experts but did want to get stuff done with them.
To be fair, lots of other companies built their careers on that premise. It did not take any brilliance to realise the obvious. This is mythology.
Originally posted by johnmflores But you sound like an "insider", someone with extensive computer experience (an Amiga? Awesome!) and not afraid of dealing with the intricacies of them to get something done.
Amigas were used by everyday folk, I can assure you! They were great for gaming, MIDI sequencing and graphics in general. The scientists and business boffins were in a different room.
In my day-to-day work I just want to get jobs done. That's why I don't run LINUX on the desktop. No matter what my level of professional involvement (none currently) I have always been passing familiar with end-users of all stripes, and have spent a good amount of time helping them. There's a few things I can say with certainty.
An MS-Windows PC is no more or less intimidating than a Mac. And never has been. They are both equally scary at first, and equally easy later on. In fact, people can learn the most arcane command-line interface if they have motivation. Just try to replace that familiar interface with a graphical interface and you will have a mutiny on your hands. (Been there, too!) The "intuitive" interface is also a myth. People simply like what they are used to.
Originally posted by johnmflores What's so wrong about trying to make it a bit easier or at least more approachable?
Nothing at all. But the K-01 is a poor attempt since it doesn't actually change anything about the camera interface from its DSLR counterpart. Except the lack of a viewfinder, which will make some users more comfortable.
Originally posted by johnmflores snowboarding and surfing to really learn the thing. Had they all asked me today what camera to get, I'd undoubtedly tell them to look at the K-01.
Er, why? How does it save them from all that complexity?
Originally posted by johnmflores At the end of the day, what's so bad about being less than perfectly rational? What's so wrong about adding some personality to our digital lives? Does it need to be dismissively labeled as "conspicuous consumption"? Can't it also be called "having a little fun"?
Yep, everyone likes a little fun. (And if you'd ever seen my performance art you might doubt my rationality!) But in my book fun is cheap, not expensive. My friends want a camera for 200 clams not 800. Because the economy has collapsed and that's all they have.
Not to mention that being part of a cult of personality or cult of brand is the very opposite of fun. Hence my continuing need to prick the bubble that is Apple's inflated ego. And hence my continuing refusal to be taken in by Pentax marketing in their assertions about the glorious future for their last two camera systems. (Actually, they don't seem too convinced!)
Originally posted by johnmflores and a desire to be cast in the remake of Kubrick's 2001: A Space Odyssey.
Definitely. SF imagery now leads design and innovation. A friend of mine even wrote a book about it.
Star Trek: Technologies of Disappearance by Alan N. Shapiro, published by Verlag Avinus.