Sony Interview (Please Translate)

[Sis]

I'm not sure I agree with your primary reason. Who created this dumbed-down version, when, and was it as well known as Word plus bundled with the most popular office suite of all time...

Works was a slimmed down version. But to your second point, asking if there's an example of said dumbed down version that's as well known as Word plus bundled with the most popular office suite is a circular argument and one that would implicitly negate my point.

The truth of the matter is that nobody here (in this discussion) actually knows what the use case scenarios are for Word for a home user. I'm sure the Office team knows what features get used, either from user research or sampled from the custumer experience program (or whatever it's called). So while I think the features you picked out are good ones, I think you're oversimplifying them. For instance, you list "tables" as a feature. When I look at Word, this encompasses multiple feature items (a whole new menu in fact). You say "references", and again I see multiple menu items for managing this. Page layout is a huge feature set.

So while I agree that there are business functions that could get trimmed out, I don't believe this removes much of the complexity. And reducing the feature set usually is a bad option for addressing usability concerns, since you're just removing costly work and not addressing the root cause of the issue, which is software abstraction that doesn't match the user's expectation.

 

[Urian]

It seems that the PS3 is the return of the HomeComputers like the Amiga, Atari ST, Commodore 64 and others relics of the past.

 

[TheChefO]

It seems that the PS3 is the return of the HomeComputers like the Amiga, Atari ST, Commodore 64 and others relics of the past.

But this market is a much different one than when those machines went retail. At the time the ability to pipe your media (aka 8trax/cassette tapes/vhs/betamax) through a home computer/console was impossible. The market is ripe for this tech/direction.

I hope they drive this one home and force MS to compete in the same space.

 

[scooby_dooby]

The problem with Word, that makes it hard to use, is not the user interface, but the fact it's a buggy piece of shit, that is too smart for it's own good, and is constantly doing stuff you don't want it to do.

As much as I think word is a buggy piece of shit, I realize that creating an app of this magnitude would be one HARD project, I would not envy anyone in this position, and I respect that fact, it's NOT easy!

I think the bottom line here is, it's very easy to sit back and criticize a piece of software, to create lists of all the 'faults' and stupid decisions you see within that software. It's MUCH harder to actually create a viable alternative of your own.

People criticize MS all day long, but in the end, where are the alternatives? Where are all these great imrpovements? You can blame it ALL on MS being a monopoly and using unfair business practices, at some point you have to give them credit for creating compelling software that worked for consumers.

 

[RobertR1]

The problem with Word, that makes it hard to use, is not the user interface, but the fact it's a buggy piece of shit, that is too smart for it's own good, and is constantly doing stuff you don't want it to do.

As much as I think word is a buggy piece of shit, I realize that creating an app of this magnitude would be one HARD project, I would not envy anyone in this position, and I respect that fact, it's NOT easy!

I think the bottom line here is, it's very easy to sit back and criticize a piece of software, to create lists of all the 'faults' and stupid decisions you see within that software. It's MUCH harder to actually create a viable alternative of your own.

People criticize MS all day long, but in the end, where are the alternatives? Where are all these great imrpovements? You can blame it ALL on MS being a monopoly and using unfair business practices, at some point you have to give them credit for creating compelling software that worked for consumers.

Exactly, where is the competition? Had MS and all their core products been as horrible as some people make it out to be, there would naturally be competition spawning and thriving but the fact is that their prodcuts work well for 90% of the population. Even more importantly it all works transparently to the end user and their intergration with other products is seamless.

 

[Black Dragon37]

Exactly, where is the competition?

What about Apple?

 

[TheChefO]

What about Apple?

What apple?

with them switching to intel and offering dual boot to windows we could see a much stronger competition from that camp but I don't think that will be anytime soon.

 

[RobertR1]

What about Apple?

I said competition, not "oh I wanna be different!"

 

[Shifty Geezer]

Exactly, where is the competition? Had MS and all their core products been as horrible as some people make it out to be, there would naturally be competition spawning and thriving.

It's not that straightforward. Word was a good product and deserved to win out in it's day against lots of competition. But now you've a devil of a job to oust it. Even if Windows isn't the greatest OS possible, it's basically impossible for someone to produce an alternative to oust it, because of the need for software. The only obvious chance for competition is something like Linux, a slow adoption which is mostly being progressed by volunteer work. It's far more complicated than just 'the best product wins.' History is replete with the victor of competing standards/formats being the inferior. Plus I don't think the main arguments are 'MS core products are rubbish' but given a chance to improve things with a new load of software on a new machine targetted for the home rather than the business, could things be improved?

 

[one]

I think the bottom line here is, it's very easy to sit back and criticize a piece of software, to create lists of all the 'faults' and stupid decisions you see within that software. It's MUCH harder to actually create a viable alternative of your own.

Have you read what DemoCoder wrote?

It's called bundling and uncompetitive API behavior. Once bundling established Office, compatability with document format kept it there. That's why MS is so scared of ODF.

Basically Word is THE processor of the .doc format governments and corporations are dependent on today. If you try to use a third-party rich-document editor you suffer from incompatibility with newer .doc formats. So the argument that others are incompetent to design a good app is only applicable to the days when MS Office was not the de facto standard. Whether it's right or not is dependent on court cases such as
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2005/06/14/_novell_microsoft/

 

[scooby_dooby]

So the argument that others are incompetent to design a good app is only applies to the days when MS Office was not the de facto standard.

Obviously. That;'s exactly what I was alluding to when I said 'at one point there were viable alternatives' As I said though, eventually that excuse runs out of gas IMO, you can't blame it ALL on MS being the devil, they also happen to create applications that people like. Are they perfect? Of course not. But show me the perfect software package and I'll show 100 that are not.

It just seems so many people refuse to give them any credit whatsover, as if they've never written a good piece of aoftware in their history and that all their success is attributed to unfair business practices, it's simply not true. MS makes many great apps that people all over the world CHOOSE to use because they work well, that's the only way you can have truly successful software.

 

[one]

Obviously. That;'s exactly what I was alluding to when I said 'at one point there were viable alternatives' As I said though, eventually that excuse runs out of gas IMO, you can't blame it ALL on MS being the devil, they also happen to create applications that people like. Are they perfect? Of course not. But show me the perfect software package and I'll show 100 that are not.

It just seems so many people refuse to give them any credit whatsover, as if they've never written a good piece of aoftware in their history and that all their success is attributed to unfair business practices, it's simply not true. MS makes many great apps that people all over the world CHOOSE to use because they work well, that's the only way you can have truly successful software.

People already give them credit in the form of money

Now have you read the link I provided above? I wrote about the .doc format in my post, but the other point is about Windows API. Automation in Excel killed the competitior.

Novell's newer suit claims Microsoft used an unfair technical advantage provided by Windows and sharp business practices to rob WordPerfect and Quattro Pro of market share.

 

[DemoCoder]

Apropos, let's see how well Google Word and Spreadsheet do. Google's Excel competitor was launched today.

http://www.google.com/googlespreadsheets/tour1.html

 

[_phil_]

The trick is to just lower our expectations.and everything will be fine..[not really].
Not enough $$ , time (and smart imagination) put on ergonomy.MAYA has done some breakthroughs in that field for example.

 

[Powderkeg]

But this market is a much different one than when those machines went retail. At the time the ability to pipe your media (aka 8trax/cassette tapes/vhs/betamax) through a home computer/console was impossible. The market is ripe for this tech/direction.

Is the market really any different?

the hardware sure is. The hardware allows for all kinds of new options, but is the market actually different now. Are people really wanting a single multi-use, multimedia device that's also a game consoles? I'm not so sure.

People wanted TV's and people wanted VCR's, so surely there must have been a great market for a TV/VCR combo unit, right? But they never really sold well.

People wanted VCR and people wanted DVD, so DVD/VCR combo players would seem like a great idea, but they don't sell well either.

People want DVD players and they want DD5.1 stereos, but those combo units aren't exactly big sellers either.

And people want game consoles and they want DVR's, but the PSX still sold so poorly that it never made it to the US market.

Hardware by itself does not create market demand for the product. Unless I am shown compelling evidence to the contrary I am inclined to believe that most people who are looking to buy a game console just want a game console and don't give a flip about what other features it may or may not have.

 

[zed]

from the dvd wiki entry

The format on gaming systems

In 2000, Sony released its PlayStation 2 console in Japan. In addition to playing video games developed for the system it was also able to play DVD movies. This proved to be a huge selling point because the PS2 cost about the same as standard DVD players but could do much more. As a result, many electronic stores that normally did not carry video game consoles carried PS2s. In keeping with this tradition, Sony has announced that it will implement one of DVD's possible successors, Blu-ray, into its next PlayStation console currently known as the PlayStation 3.

 

[Sis]

from the dvd wiki entry

The format on gaming systems

In 2000, Sony released its PlayStation 2 console in Japan. In addition to playing video games developed for the system it was also able to play DVD movies. This proved to be a huge selling point because the PS2 cost about the same as standard DVD players but could do much more. As a result, many electronic stores that normally did not carry video game consoles carried PS2s. In keeping with this tradition, Sony has announced that it will implement one of DVD's possible successors, Blu-ray, into its next PlayStation console currently known as the PlayStation 3.

The difference between the PS3 and the PS1/2 is that those were piggybacking off an established format. Regardless the PS2's use of it, DVD was already well on its way to success.

The PS3 has only skin-deep similarities to the PS2 in this regard.

 

[TheChefO]

Is the market really any different?

the hardware sure is. The hardware allows for all kinds of new options, but is the market actually different now. Are people really wanting a single multi-use, multimedia device that's also a game consoles? I'm not so sure.

People wanted TV's and people wanted VCR's, so surely there must have been a great market for a TV/VCR combo unit, right? But they never really sold well.

People wanted VCR and people wanted DVD, so DVD/VCR combo players would seem like a great idea, but they don't sell well either.

People want DVD players and they want DD5.1 stereos, but those combo units aren't exactly big sellers either.

And people want game consoles and they want DVR's, but the PSX still sold so poorly that it never made it to the US market.

Hardware by itself does not create market demand for the product. Unless I am shown compelling evidence to the contrary I am inclined to believe that most people who are looking to buy a game console just want a game console and don't give a flip about what other features it may or may not have.

Excellent points - as I didn't think of it from that angle. In my view the reason I was never attracted to those devices is if one craps out on you then your left without both while the one device is in for repairs. Not only that but traditionally the combo units are of lower quality.

One thing that is very different about the examples you gave though is that the component guts are different for the individual units and must be combined without significant costs savings in the combo units.

With games consoles there is no reason for them not to have software available to perform other functions which the hardware is clearly capable of performing without significant addition.

example:
blower/leaf vac - one could buy a leaf blower and a seperate leaf vac but the guts are basicly the same so it would be pointless to buy two units when one unit can do the same job for a lot less money.

I'm not saying there isn't a place for the pc in peoples lives. I'm saying there's no reason to be stuck with just a leaf blower when the leaf vacuum attachment should be fairly cheap to add.

 

[TheChefO]

The difference between the PS3 and the PS1/2 is that those were piggybacking off an established format. Regardless the PS2's use of it, DVD was already well on its way to success.

The PS3 has only skin-deep similarities to the PS2 in this regard.

Exactly. If I could have only put it so well perhaps I'd have a better rep on this board

 

[NANOTEC]

Since Firmware 2.0 (a decent while ago) the PSP has a very decent browser, and the 480x272 screen is one of the best screens to browse on, especially since it is in a wide-screen ratio and it still is one of the best screens on the market. And web-pages look absolutely great.

Since then, the PSP's browser has been upgraded and optimised, and it has only gotten better. Recently it added Flash support, which isn't great yet, but like everything else, you can switch everything on or off (animations, graphics, etc.) You even have 3 tabs.

Typing isn't optimal, but it's ok, and certainly sufficient for logging in and googling, and of course you can have it remember passwords and frequently used fields. Bookmarks help a lot too. It has lots of clever scrolling stuff, like you can jump links and inputs in all directions with the d-pad and have the screen auto-scroll, you can hold the square to scroll the page with the analog stick in all directions, the shoulder buttons give forward and back, and so on.

It doesn't stop there either. The PSP supports RSS 2.0 with all the audio and such features. There are programs for PC allowing you to stream your mp3 collection to an RSS channel on the PSP for example.

There's nothing there that points to intuitive GUI, it's just a list of features that doesn't say much about convenience. Sufficient doesn't equal convenient. Again a PDA with a 640x480 screen using Opera with stylus input is much more conventient than a PSP with 480x272 screen using a thumbstick and buttons no matter how much one wants to believe it to be. Like i said earlier compared to what is the question.

The Dreamcast was designed for TV and in an age where internet wasn't all broadbandy and all over the place. A PSP slips into your pocket a great deal easier than a laptop. Convenience is a matter of context. There are actually a great deal of things a PSP may be more convenient for than you think.

More convenient than what? A Dreamcast? Sure but it's not because of the user interface, it's because of WiFi. Fact is it's still miles behind a PDA though in terms of convenience.

In the Homebrew scene, the well reputed links2 browser that you can get either standalone or as a plugin to the excellent PSPRadio shoutcast client is also nothing to sneeze at. It is lightning fast, and has a very convenient keyboard input system (Danzeff). While this isn't a common product, it does an excellent job of how different browser implementations can work really well on the PSP.

Does it require a hack or new firmware?

If the PS3 takes a queue from this, or if the PSP is a prelude to the PS3 (as was the PSX to a lesser extent), then things are looking pretty good.

If you think PSP is convenient then browsing with a DC/PS3 using a thumb stick would likely seem convenient too.

I'm refraining from saying what I think about trashtalking a feature on a device you haven't tested (quick! someone give me good rep! )

It doesn't take much to figure out that for web browsing, a stylus is a much superior input method than a thumbstick.