This is, in some senses, a sign that programming and computer systems are getting better. You don't want people to have to learn the difference between a browser and the web and a search engine and an operating system - you want things to just work.
For most people once their machine is set up this is the case, and then when they want something different, they don't know what they're asking. This is a sign of success, and not a sign that the users are stupid.
Although it must be admitted some of them are.
So here's the question. If you run a service, how much do you insist your users learn before they can actually use it? Anything? Nothing?
Added in edit:
"What is a Browser" is a similar issue (linked to elsewhere from this thread, and from previous submissions:
You don't want people to have to learn the difference between a browser and the web and a search engine and an operating system - you want things to just work.
Except that things still aren't at the "just work" stage, and perhaps never will be.
People who are ignorant of cars or washing machines can nowadays use their cars and washing machines for years without running into any weird situation they don't know how to fix. But people who are ignorant of computers seem to wind up having weird problems they don't understand quite regularly.
I'd say that's not a design issue, that's just to do with the fact that a computer is a more complex tool, with a much wider range of possible inputs, than a car is.
I think it's only make sense for average people who don't need to exploit computers to the nth degrees.
But for people who require more power, the computer should shift to a system that let them easily learn and than manipulate that power, like emacs or like early computers that create whole generation of hackers.
For most people, computers are an appliance, not a tool that you master over time. It is awesome that computers are progressing to that "easy" way, but it is not so awesome when other dimension of computers as tool slip away. It's like the computer becoming more easier for grandma while raising the barrier of entry for those who want to learn and create on the computer.
Not knowing something, and not needing to know it, is progress. Not knowing something despite needing to know it is not progress.
People will always need to know things. (Otherwise we could have instant "progress" by lobotomizing the users and leaving them drooling helplessly on their keyboards.) It's bad to decrease your users' savvy faster than you decrease their need for it.
How well do you know the inner workings of all of the tools you use on a daily basis? Obviously you have a mental model of them. But is it accurate enough to make a similar kind of distinction between a web browser and a search engine?
For things like a search engine I think it makes more sense to compare it to the supply chain that produces other things that we use. The page that shows up in the web browser that we interact with is more akin to a piece of fruit we buy in the grocery store. I certainly know how to eat a banana, but I couldn't begin to tell you how many companies and technologies were involved in delivering that banana to me.
I wonder what percentage of the broader audience has difficulties like the one mentioned in that thread. I'm within a few weeks of launching a Web 2.0 startup focused on the mortgage industry. One of our goals is to make shopping for mortgages very easy to understand. But I'm not sure how we do that for someone who is also having problems typing "www.google.com" in an address bar. Should my goal be to make my product usable for the (I hope) 5%-10% of the market that has these sorts of difficulties? Or should I write them off, and focus on making the best product for the people out there who are more capable? It's an interesting question to ponder.
I saw a company recently announce they would not be supporting IE6 any longer.
The questions in their forums ranged from confused to bizarre. My favorite was "will I have to back up all of my [member data on their site] or will it still be here?"
People truly do not understand what is going on here - they have no idea what is stored/processed a remote server, what is happening locally, what a browser or another desktop program is, etc. I thought computer illiteracy would become less of a problem as more people used computers every day, but unfortunately, it's worked differently than expected. The average level of confusion has stayed the same and the ranks of the confused have grown.
Anyone know what is being taught regarding technolgy and the Internet in the us elementary and high school systems? Is Internet 101 a mandatory class that teaches these basics and some HTML? I sure hope so!
Google Chrome is a web browser, kind of like your tool to let you connect to the internet. There are a lot of different web browsers you can use to connect to the internet
As an example, a video made by Google that illustrates that point: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o4MwTvtyrUQ, focusing on the difference between a browser and a search engine.
For most people once their machine is set up this is the case, and then when they want something different, they don't know what they're asking. This is a sign of success, and not a sign that the users are stupid.
Although it must be admitted some of them are.
So here's the question. If you run a service, how much do you insist your users learn before they can actually use it? Anything? Nothing?
Added in edit:
"What is a Browser" is a similar issue (linked to elsewhere from this thread, and from previous submissions:
http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=662105
http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=653962
http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=626482
As I say - having people not knowing about these things is a measure of success.