Cars like computers?

[sicofante]

I'm a very user oriented geek, so I tend to enter hot discussions about software being too harsh on ordinary users. But today I stumbled upon a really funny web page:

http://www.leo.org/information/freizeit/fun/cars.html

While I believe software "for human beings" should always think of the users first, this is a good reminder that users should care about learning their tools as well.

Since it's old, many of you probably know it already (I didn't), but for those who don't I hope you enjoy.

[Dale61]

Here's something else that compares cars to computers, but I've had this as a word document for a couple of years, so most of you may have already seen it.


Microsoft vs. GM

At a recent computer expo (COMDEX), Bill Gates, CEO of Microsoft reportedly compared the computer industry with the automobile industry and stated: "If General Motors had kept up with technology like the computer industry has, we would all be driving $25.00 cars that got 1000 miles to the gallon".

In response to Bill Gates's comments, General Motors issued a press release stating: "If GM had developed technology like Microsoft, we would all be driving cars with the following characteristics:"

1.For no reason whatsoever, your car would crash twice a day.

2.Every time they repainted the lines on the road, you would have to buy a new car.

3.Occasionally your car would die on the highway for no reason, and you would just accept this, restart, and drive on.

4.Occasionally, executing a manoeuvre such as a left turn would cause your car to shut down and refuse to start, in which case you would have to reinstall the engine.

5.Only one person at a time could use the car, unless you bought "Car95", "Car98", or "CarNT". But then you would have to buy more seats.

6.Macintosh would make a car that was powered by the sun, reliable, five times as fast, and twice as easy to drive, but would only run on 5% of the roads.

7.The oil, water temperature, and alternator warning lights would be replaced by a single "general car fault" warning light.

8.New seats would force everyone to have the same size derriere.

9.The airbag system would say, "Are you sure?" before deploying.

10.Occasionally, for no reason whatsoever, your car would lock you out and refuse to let you in until you simultaneously lifted the door handle, turned the key, and grabbed hold of the radio antenna.

11.GM would require all car buyers to also purchase a deluxe set of Rand-McNally road maps (now a GM subsidiary), even though you neither need them nor want them. Attempting to delete this option would immediately cause the car's performance to diminish by 50% or more. Moreover, GM would become a target for investigation by the Justice Department.

12.Every time GM introduced a new model, car buyers would have to learn how to drive all over again because none of the controls would operate in the same manner as the old car.

13.You would have to press the "start" button to shut off the engine.

[SeanHodges]

Very funny, i enjoyed reading that thanks!

[prizrak]

Actually from what I see on the road only about 5% of people know how to drive the rest more or less guess at what those pedal and round thingies do.

Also if you read the manual for any car it does look just like those tech support calls. They literally tell you to shift auto and manual, how to accelerate and brake and how to open/close doors/windows. It's basically a crash course in driving.

I do find it funny how people have no problem with needing to get a permit and then take a test to get a license to be allowed to even buy a car (tho I think you can buy one with a permit not sure) but they expect the computer to do things for them. It's even funnier because the car is pretty simple you got 2 pedals (3 in a stick) a gear shifter (which in auto is used like once during driving) and a steering wheel. All those things are 100% analog and intuitive to use yet no one bitches about having to learn to drive. Something as complex as a computer and software that can be used for just about any purpose you can think of (and some you can't) people expect to be completely effortless.

[Brunellus]

Actually from what I see on the road only about 5% of people know how to drive the rest more or less guess at what those pedal and round thingies do.

Also if you read the manual for any car it does look just like those tech support calls. They literally tell you to shift auto and manual, how to accelerate and brake and how to open/close doors/windows. It's basically a crash course in driving.

I do find it funny how people have no problem with needing to get a permit and then take a test to get a license to be allowed to even buy a car (tho I think you can buy one with a permit not sure) but they expect the computer to do things for them. It's even funnier because the car is pretty simple you got 2 pedals (3 in a stick) a gear shifter (which in auto is used like once during driving) and a steering wheel. All those things are 100% analog and intuitive to use yet no one bitches about having to learn to drive. Something as complex as a computer and software that can be used for just about any purpose you can think of (and some you can't) people expect to be completely effortless.
Car manuals are not really manuals. They are amulets against frivolous lawsuits. Notice how poorly-written and poorly-organized car manuals are--you wouldn't expect a proper technical manual to be that badly-executed. This is particularly jarring if you look at a shop manual versus the manual that ships with the car.

Car manuals *do,* however, come with all manner of warnings and disclaimers. If you wreck the car and bring a suit against the manufacturer, dollars to doughnuts the first thing they will say is that their duty of care was fulfilled when they gave you the manual. After all, they *did* warn you, and you failed to RTFM.

[prizrak]

Car manuals are not really manuals. They are amulets against frivolous lawsuits. Notice how poorly-written and poorly-organized car manuals are--you wouldn't expect a proper technical manual to be that badly-executed. This is particularly jarring if you look at a shop manual versus the manual that ships with the car.

Car manuals *do,* however, come with all manner of warnings and disclaimers. If you wreck the car and bring a suit against the manufacturer, dollars to doughnuts the first thing they will say is that their duty of care was fulfilled when they gave you the manual. After all, they *did* warn you, and you failed to RTFM.

I actually think that the car manuals are pretty good for what they are meant to do. It's not a mechanic manual and it was never meant to be but the basics that most people would need are covered. Maybe you been real unlucky with your manuals or something. Then again I will beat any car to the ground before I do any upgrades beyond brakes just so I can be sure I pulled all of the potential out of it or at the very least reached my limit as a driver.

[Brunellus]

I actually think that the car manuals are pretty good for what they are meant to do. It's not a mechanic manual and it was never meant to be but the basics that most people would need are covered. Maybe you been real unlucky with your manuals or something. Then again I will beat any car to the ground before I do any upgrades beyond brakes just so I can be sure I pulled all of the potential out of it or at the very least reached my limit as a driver.
If I've just been unlucky, I wonder what a good manual will look like.

My particular gripe is that the indexing is bad, the topics are spread out, and it takes too ******* long to find out what fuse to replace when something has gone wrong.

[prizrak]

If I've just been unlucky, I wonder what a good manual will look like.

My particular gripe is that the indexing is bad, the topics are spread out, and it takes too ******* long to find out what fuse to replace when something has gone wrong.

Oh ok so you basically need the mechanic's manual as opposed to a user manual. Yes for that the normal manual is completely and utterly horrible. In my experience Index sux everywhere when it's on paper you really need a computer for quick searching. I do think it's crazy that you have to pay like $50+ for a manual that will tell you what fuse needs to be replaced.

[bastiegast]

6.Macintosh would make a car that was powered by the sun, reliable, five times as fast, and twice as easy to drive, but would only run on 5% of the roads.


Very funny, somehow :) Applies for linux as well.

[prizrak]

Very funny, somehow :) Applies for linux as well.
No Linux would be a vehicle that can be customized to be used for any purpose including on water and in the air.
Each part of it will be made by a different company and available for free to anyone who wants to use it.
Some companies will put it together for you either for a price of warranty or free (but then no warranty)
Most people will have to take a car mechanics course just to use it :)

[MetalMusicAddict]

Heres my Cars like Computers thing. ;)

My Dad grew up a hot-rodder in the US. Hand-built a 1932 model A Ford. Black. Flames on the sides. Half the body was fiberglass. Custom interior. Small-block Chevy. ;) 12.3 seconds @ 110mph in the 1/4 mile. Not bad for something he did himself. ;)

So, when I was little and into my teens I had him doing cars. I learned alot but never got into it because I figured I couldnt top it. :)

Then, a couple of years later, in my 20's I got into computers. I very quickly saw how working on or building computers was very close to car hot-rodding. All the work and crazy things you can do. Alot like building a car.

So has anyone else seen this? :)