... [C]omputers are, by and large, an easier switch than the cars. Yes, the pedals and steering wheel and shifter are consistent, but getting the windshield wipers to do what you want is a research project on every car, as is setting the interior lighting and adjusting the audio for bass, treble, and so on, and a bunch of other minor functions that you need to do all the time. But cutting and pasting and moving files and editing text and browsing the web and reading mail and improving photos and so on, these days that’s all much of a muchness, whatever computer you’re sitting in front of.
I think people who are technically astute forget just how much minor interface changes affect the productivity of those who are non-technically inclined.
An example in point: my partner called me up today in exaperation because she couldn't find the "distribution list" option in Outlook 2003. No doubt any techo using Outlook 2003 for the first time noticed the change and probably even had an opinion on whether the change was a good one ... BUT we mentally shrug our shoulders and get used to navigating around the new UI metaphor.
The very concept of "not being able to find something" is alien to us because we understand interface hints and layout idioms of most software: drop-down arrows, right-clicking, Tools -> Options, drag-and-drop etc. etc.
Even something as "obvious" as CTRL+C for copy isn't understood by a large chunk of the computing population.
Some people would say this is a generational problem and that people growing up today will intuitively "understand" computers and the interface metaphors. But I wonder ... after all, most people effectively learn to drive "from scratch". They haven't really picked up how to drive by watching their parents or anything.
And yet, anyone with 12 months of driving experience can move more or less freely between any make and model of car. I don't see that same level of expertise transfer with computer operating systems.
