Entry 2275, on 2023-06-01 at 14:28:05 (Rating 2, Computers)
The way computers work, and occasionally don't work, is a common subject for ridicule and humour for many people, but at the same time many others are impressed at what they can now do. So, on one hand, the capabilities of modern computers, and related devices like smartphones, are truly amazing, and the fact that so many people use them, and the trend for them to often become an "addiction", is an undeniable sign of this. But on the other, we have a degree of cynicism around the issues many computers have.
There's a meme going around - in fact it goes back many years, but seems to have recently resurfaced - involving Bill Gates and car manufacturer, General Motors.
Here's the meme, which I will comment on later...
At a recent computer expo (COMDEX), Bill Gates reportedly compared the computer industry with the auto industry and stated: "If General Motors (GM) had kept up with technology like the computer industry has, we would all be driving $25 cars that got 1,000 miles to the gallon."
In response to Bill's comments, General Motors issued a press release stating:
If GM had developed technology like Microsoft [I assume this might apply to other manufacturers as well, so I'm interpreting it that way], 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 in the road, you would have to buy a new car.
3. Occasionally your car would die on the freeway for no reason. You would have to pull to the side of the road, close all of the windows, shut off the car, restart it, and reopen the windows before you could continue. For some reason you would simply accept this.
4. Occasionally, executing a manoeuvre such as a left turn would cause your car to shut down and refuse to restart, in which case you would have to reinstall the engine.
5. Macintosh would make a car that was powered by the sun, was reliable, five times as fast and twice as easy to drive - but would run on only five percent of the roads.
6. The oil, water temperature, and alternator warning lights would all be replaced by a single "This Car Has Performed An Illegal Operation" warning light.
7. The airbag system would ask "Are you sure?" before deploying.
8. 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.
9. Every time a new car was introduced, 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.
10. You'd have to press the "Start" button to turn the engine off.
So there are the claims; let's have a look at how relevant they are...
1. I do remember, back in the 80s and maybe the 90s, my Mac might crash at least once every day, and I would accept that and just restart. However, modern Macs in many cases will run indefinitely without any crashes requiring a restart. I have servers which have run continuously for years, and even my laptop, which I install a lot of stuff on, is only restarted or shutdown for major system upgrades.
I think the same applies to PCs running Windows, although I get the impression (admittedly without hard data) that restarts a bit more common there, but not twice a day, unless there is a specific issue which needs fixed.
So problems with computers probably happen with similar frequency to problems with cars now, making the first point somewhat obsolete.
2. In the past it was useful to buy a new computer every 2 or 3 years, but I have 10 year old computers now which are still very useful, although they do miss out on some new features more recent models have. But, although computers don't require updates as often as they used to, they still aren't usable for as long as cars, so that point has some merit.
Of course I do have to say that those upgrades for computers get you piles of new capabilities, where a new car might be just a bit more economical, or have a better transmission, but in most cases doesn't have a lot of new stuff, unless you upgrade from a 1990s Toyota to a modern Tesla!
3. This reliability issue is similar to point 1, so the same comments apply.
4. The big difference between cars and computers is that, in the vast majority of cases, cars stay as they are out of the factory, but computers have all sorts of added components installed, and many come from companies who did not create the computer.
So the computer might be made by Dell, the OS by Microsoft, the wifi adapter driver by some anonymous Chinese company, the web browser by Google, the antivirus software by Sophos, the VPN by Express, and we wonder why all the bits don't always behave correctly together.
To use the car analogy, we would have a Toyota chassis with a Ford engine, a Mitsubishi engine management computer, and an Audi transmission, then we would wonder why sometimes they don't work properly as a whole.
This is one (of many) reasons I prefer the Mac platform: the hardware, operating system, most drivers, and a lot of the software all come from Apple, so they work together a lot better.
5. Well I'm a Mac user so I'm already convinced by that argument, but as more services move to the cloud, and are therefore platform independent, the idea that the Mac is a bit of an "orphan" is less true. Also, modern PCs have got better and, while Macs are still superior, at least PCs are more usable than they were.
6. I do accept this one. The "This Computer Has Performed An Illegal Operation" is a common message seen on computers, although the "Check Engine" light offers very little extra information on cars, unless you have an OBD device, which ironically usually uploads information to a computer or smart phone!
But I would love to see proper error messages on computers. In most cases the information is already there, because a lower level program has delivered an error message to the program you are using. Putting error code -14306 may not mean much to the average user, but at least it gives an expert something to work with.
7. I agree that there are probably too many requests for confirmation of operations. If I click a button I don't need the computer to request confirmation; instead give me an undo option for the occasions when I do click it accidentally. In many cases people are so used to the message appearing that they just click OK without even reading the message, so what's the point?
And sometimes a warning on a car might be useful, like "do you really want to engage reverse while travelling forward at 100 kph?"
8. Being locked out, or getting other similar faults, and requiring an obscure process to get back in does happen sometimes on computers, but it happens on cars sometimes too.
One of my cars has a keyless entry system, and I still don't know under what exact circumstances it locks and unlocks doors. Complicating factors include: are you standing next to the tailgate, is another door already unlocked, is there another key in the car, are the lights still switched on?
Ironically, of course, these complicated car features are often managed by software in a car computer, so who's really to blame there? Also, those features are great when they work properly.
9. It is true that the basics of car operation (steering wheel, gas pedal, etc) are the same from one to the other, but what about other functions? Some cars have a clutch, some don't; some have an automatic gearbox, some have paddle shifters, some have a gear shift lever (requiring use of that extra pedal again); and don't even get me started with entertainment, climate control, and other peripheral systems!
So cars are diverging in functionality where computers seem to be converging. There are many standards today, even across platforms (Windows, macOS, Linux) and there is even a degree of similarity between computers, tablets, and phones.
Sure, it's far from perfect, but at least things are heading in the right direction.
10. Yes, on Windows you press Start to shut down, at least on some versions of Windows, but you don't on other platforms, and many procedures on cars make just as little sense, except we are more used to them, so I reject this criticism.
So, in summary, this meme would have been a lot more accurate in the past. But now things are different: not only have computers got better, but in some ways, cars have got worse, so the difference between them is far less now.
Except for one thing. If I bought a car 30 years ago it might cost $30,000, produce 200 horsepower, and have a 5 speed manual. Today it would cost a similar amount, produce 250 hp, and have an 8 speed transmission, a small but worthwhile improvement (I'm ignoring electric cars for the purposes of this comparison).
If I bought a computer 30 years ago and another one today, the modern one would cost half as much, have a hundred thousand times as much memory, run at ten thousand times the speed, and be able to do ten times as many things. That's like that car producing 20 million horsepower and having a top speed of two million kilometers per hour, and it also flies and floats on water.
The computer industry could do better, but I do believe it has a lot to be proud of in comparison to cars!
Comment 1 by Anonymous on 2023-06-09 at 16:28:59:
You should note that this memo from GM is to Bill Gates at Microsoft so it seem like it might be from some time in the past. Both computers and cars are much better now.
Comment 2 by OJB on 2023-06-10 at 09:42:56:
Well, sure. I don’t like Microsoft, and avoid their products, except occasionally at work where I have to use their stuff to work with the systems. But the same criticism applies to some extent to other companies as well, even Apple!
You can leave comments about this using this form.
Enter name, email (optional), enter number, comment, click Add. You can leave the name blank if you want to remain anonymous. Enter your email address to receive notifications of replies. Comment should appear immediately (authorisation is inactive).
BLOG PAGE