Re:People expect technology to suck because it sucks
by johnbrodie on Friday September 25, 2020 @03:37PM
(#24593359)
A car has tons of parts that, sure are "governed by physics", but in effect just randomly fail. I can theoretically understand that my there's a clunk in the frontend of my car because I've exceeded the MTTF of a suspension bushing. To almost everyone though, it's essentially just a random event based on nothing they've perceived.
Re:People expect technology to suck because it sucks
by kthejoker2 on Friday September 25, 2020 @06:14PM
(#24594664)
John Deere has entered the chat.
Also, car companies have been tinkering with "electronic repossession" - remote kill switches due to nonpayment.
So ... get ready for other things to suck as we attach technology to them.
Re:People expect technology to suck because it sucks
by fsflover on Monday September 28, 2020 @11:47AM
(#24617917)
> John Deere has entered the chat.
Thank you for bringing this point. The actual problem is not the software itself, but its proprietary nature and infinite hunt for profit without any limits. Consider free software instead and you will see that it is improving year by year, despite very slowly (which is logical, in the absence of infinite resources).
My Linux machine never forces me to reboot, shows any ads or suddenly changes its interface.
No. A hardware product like a car has predictable wear and tear governed mainly by the laws of physics. The fact that I can no longer use my smart speaker because the manufacturer decided to stop supporting it, went out of business, or got bought is not at all the same. My car will still work through all of those things in the exact same way. It also doesn't throw up random dialogs (or whatever a physical equivalent would be) that stop the product from working until I interact with it. Not the same at all.