[wplug] [Advocacy] Re: My distro beat up your distro (yet again, sigh) -- Consumers

[Bryan J. Smith]

On Tue, Jul 24, 2007 at 08:16:57AM -0400, Michael H. Semcheski wrote:
> In the average year, the average user doesn't spend as much
> time as it took me to write this email thinking about
> Microsoft.

True.  At the same time, they will blame Microsoft for their own
oversight(s) as a consumer.  That might be the American Libertarian /
evil Capitalist talking in myself, but it's the attitude I have.  Yes,
this is the "buyer beware" attitude, and it's served me extremely -- and
I mean extremely -- well.

Consumer choice is a rather powerful instrument.

And yes, I have professionally caught Microsoft unprepared at various
Fortune 100 companies, costing them tens of millions.  Not by merely
saying Linux, but exposing repeat value they have not only not provided,
but actually over-charged for (e.g., software assurance and failed
delivery).  Microsoft Gold Partners walk in and see me and cringe.

And the ultimate irony is that they can't pull "Microsoft certification
rank" on me either, even I do far less than 10% Microsoft in my career
(Microsoft exams continue to be a joke, but I take them because it's
hard to be a consultant in this business without them -- despite the
fact that they are useless).


On Tue, 2007-07-24 at 16:52 -0400, D. Joe wrote:
> What irks me so much with the idea is that it shoots holes in
> the whole idea of specialization--to really make a
> well-"informed" medical decision, I'd need training that
> approaches what what my doctor has, wouldn't I?  Who has time to
> become that well informed in every product or service that one
> buys these days?

Step one is realizing you _do_ have choice.  E.g., Don't opt for the HMO
or cheaper plan, go for the expensive PPO.  With a PPO you can opt for a
second opinion.  If you're company doesn't offer a PPO, go outside your
company.  Yes, the government will penalize you for doing so, but it's
worth it.

Step two is realizing what a choice may _cost_ you.  E.g., don't take
the "free MS Office" lunch, like over 90% of consumers did.  Think of
where your documents will be in three (3) years.  Look at the track
record of the vendor/software and long-term compatibility.  Look beyond
three (3) years.

If there is a _repeat_ theme with the Japanese v. American business,
it's that the Japanese think like engineers and look past three (3)
years.  American business decision makers -- with few exceptions (e.g.,
HP) -- don't.

> In other words, most people have . . . you know . . . lives.

It's the price you pay for freedom.  I don't want other people to choose
for me.  I want my choice.  It costs me time and, sometimes, money --
but it's worth it for freedom.

If you are poorly informed, then that's your fault, not anyone else's.

To say and think otherwise is to leave the concept of "freedom" and,
worse yet, the unobjective, subjective concept of "fair."  I don't like
other people, who are often interested in political matters, to decide
that for myself.  I can far greatly affect an organization _immediately_
with my dollar at any time than I can someone every 2-6 years in a vote.

> Usually, people rely on trusted professionals to help them in
> areas in which quality counts but in which the consumer does not
> have expertise.  "Trusted professional" is *exactly* the role
> that the branded players in the computer industry *should* be
> filling.  But they are not--they are *betraying* that trust.

"Trusted professional" is a good term, "in the public trust."

We have them in select industries, but not software -- don't get me
started NSPE and engineering licensing boards.  But there is hope.  At
one time they said "Environmental Engineering" wasn't a "real
engineering" either -- and that changed.  Once that hammer falls, there
will be a windfall of licensed software engineers, [engineering]
technologists and technicians.

But that still doesn't solve the ignorant consumer problem.

There is a popular video trying to prove how the moon landings are
faked.  To an engineer, the video is laughable because it prys upon the
general ignorance of angular momentum, vehicle design, light sources on
the surface of the moon, etc...  But people will argue with you over it,
because the video says so.  In other words, some consumers will believe
what they want to believe, if they can find just one (1) source that
agrees with them.

The key is to get them to talk to a "trusted professional" they already
know.

As I always say (as an engineer), "Don't believe me, but don't argue
with me either if you are not an engineer.  Ask an engineer you know and
trust if I am correct or not.  After all, I'm not an accountant, and I
wouldn't attempt to tell you about the tax code.  And if you were an
accountant but I didn't know you, I'd also take what you'd say about the
tax code and verify with an accountant I trust that you are correct."

No one can be an expert at everything, and actually very little in
general.  But that doesn't remove the "guilty by ignorance" reality.

> Here's another, different take on the issue to chew over, but
> one that still sounds a certain blame-the-victim note:
>  http://linuxmafia.com/~rick/lexicon.html#moenslaw-bicycles

I don't read Rick Moen because he has, more than once, argued with me on
something only to change to my view later.

E.g., he knocked me over 3Ware/AMCC hardware RAID cards on SVLUG many,
many years ago.  Two years later, he was signing their praises.


-- 
Bryan J. Smith         Professional, Technical Annoyance
mailto:b.j.smith at ieee.org   http://thebs413.blogspot.com
--------------------------------------------------------
        Fission Power:  An Inconvenient Solution