I am beginning to think I don’t explain myself very well! Like most computer users I do not know every common programme or website to its last and leats-used function; but I am not naive to them.
I was introduced to the Electronic Confuser at work at the end of MS-DOS, then taught the basics of WINDOWS-3.1 (Hooray – still only 8chr$ file-names but no long command lines just to copy or move them), WIN-5 (Hooray – room to name files sensibly); taught the basics of MS ‘Excel’ and ‘Word’…. and so via WIN-NT, WIN-XP and WIN-7 up to the WIN-11 MS foisted onto the computer I am using now, which was perfectly happy with WIN-10. So was I: W11 being a pretty poor copy of 10. That enforced conversion also wrecked my carefully-built photo archive and otherwise behaved in some suspicious ways; and without the licensed W10 source I could not revert it.
Oh, and via teaching myself basic BASIC on an Amstrad PCW9512, my first own PC, on which I also wrote a book manuscript.
.
I don’t expect software to work as I want, necessarily, at least not easily. I expect it to act as it often leads you to think it will; and a lot of web-sites are not designed to help you.
The best I have found for straightforward use and clarity are the gov.uk “departments”, though I realise some are for services that are themselves extremely complicated, so making the relevant site appear complicated.
The best intranet software I have seen was that used by my bank: having paid the compliment the cashier said the site’s writers were made to publish it in review form around the company so the “ordinary” staff could try it, suggest improvements, and gain some experience with it before live use. It was clear, simple, correctly ENTER / TAB-set, and so on. It looked as if based on the MS “Access” style, whose default settings let you create simple but very, clear, easy-to-use, direct entry forms and reports. Or did then, anyway.
The worst, were not web-sites but internal, Intranet-based forms at work. Some were in ‘Word’, others in ‘Excel’; some should have been in the other; cell-locking and editing controls were sloppy, TAB-ordering poor or non-existent, etc., making them needlessly difficult to use.
.
The problem I had with Amazon partly stemmed from a common weakness: the designer not telling you what you need supply, in this case not warning you to form an account before creating the order, as would seem the logical process.
The primary problem though was it thinking I have an “account” – I don’t – but obstructing all my efforts to clear it.
It wanted an “area code” – not national code: an “area code” in UK telephony is the 5 (usually) digits prefacing a land-line number. Portable ‘phones use a different system, and I was ordering within Britain, items from Amazon’s British branch. So did not expect that question!
The alternative, my e-post address, raised the allegation of an existing account already exists, as I knew is wrong.
.
Amazon’s web-site will not help you unless you have an “account” so I was trapped. It gives no open Customer Services or Help route, no other e-address or ‘phone number, no postal address (any or all, being LE 4).
I tried a couple of times using the “Forgotten password” way but this too, failed. Eventually a bureaucratic message expected me to telephone some call-centre in Canada. Not [expletive deleted] likely!
Consequently, unable to sort the problem out as I might be led to expect (LE5) , I have written to its UK head office in London, giving my real and e-addresses, to explain and ask it remove all of any details it may hold on me.
I found the address from Companies House: the UK’s civil-service web-sites are properly designed to intend straightforward use (LE 6, and this time, met).
I know umpteen people use Amazon, but I had met a problem created by it, and was blocked at every turn from correcting it in any sensible way.
If Amazon has never heard of you, it might be easy to create an account. It does not though, allow you to seek help or to solve a problem including in creating an “account”, unless you have that “account” first. I wonder if it does even then, or if it hides behind “FAQs” that show a refusal to publish proper instructions.
.
It is salient here that much of the computer-using I did at work involved very sophisticated electronic test-instruments, and they all came with proper operating and servicing manuals. Yes, you needed understand the work but the books were real manuals, not “FAQs”. The software was written by my superiors too, so specific. No popping into WH Smiths to buy a Dummies Guide To xxxxx.
====
I did not invent the terms “portable phone” – it was on a security notice in my work’s reception.
Nor “e-post” – someone on the radio had pointed out we usually call our physical post, “post” not “mail” as the Americans are more wont to do. This despite being delivered by Royal Mail.
####
What Am I Doing Today?
Not much. I am somewhat under the weather and walking round to vote was about enough. I might manage a bit of pottering about in the shed, but no serious metal-working. I’m meant to be helping run a portable* miniature railway on Sunday, but I don’t think I’ll be fit enough for that.
*The locomotive is portable and mobile; the track is only portable!