7 Mar
2005
7 Mar
'05
5:17 p.m.
There's also a persistent geek belief-system
where, once they
believe a device is technologically superior, they think it
should be popular and all those who believe otherwise are idiots.
The irony is, one person here seems to have precisely that perspective
when it comes to web forums. I wonder who that is. Hmm.
To wit, I'll summarize some of the savvy arguments
posted so far against
web-based forums: Web sites are slow. Not all browsers can use them.
You need browser plug-ins to use web sites. They're not ASCII
and you can't save ASCII from them. You can't make a local copy.
I can't run 'grep' directly on them. I'm paying for Internet
by the byte and/or minute. I don't have room for another computer.
Web sites are always immediately overrun by clueless WinXP sufferers
and will drift off-topic. Web sites are confusing because all of
them don't have the same interface. Web sites are in reverse video.
You lose the ability to edit text when posting to a web site.
And these are bad arguments why? Are these reasons somehow unjustified?
Especially things like connect charges, software incompatibilities, ...
I don't see why it's unreasonable to assert these things or how it can
be determined necessarily that the reason proceeds from nothing other
than codgerism. Perhaps people really are concerned about text editing
ability? Should that be ignored in the face of all that is new and allegedly
wonderful when in reality it might simply just be new and sucky?
A few thoughts ran through my mind while I wrote this.
One, the
phrase "Techno-Amish". Hurry, the domain name hasn't been registered.
Two, "They worship old technology, but they're scared of new technology."
I prefer Neo-Luddite.
--
---------------------------------- personal: http://www.armory.com/~spectre/ --
Cameron Kaiser, Floodgap Systems Ltd * So. Calif., USA * ckaiser at floodgap.com
-- The idea is to die young as late as possible. -- Ashley Montagu ------------