When it comes to technology, what's more important to you, high quality or high speed?I'm in the speed camp. It seems to me that when it comes to technology, progress over the last decade has been in inverse ratio to speed. High definition, digital picture, blu-ray, plasma, LCD, etc, etc. It's all well and good but what's the point when it takes years to work. I converted very late to DVD recorders, then quickly gave up on them because they drove me bananas with the slow load up time and all round general slowness; so I'm back to the video recorder. We recently got digital telly, and again the slowness would make you want to put your head through a wall, so I just watch on analogue, even though this is now poorer quality than before. Why do technology designers think efficiency doesn't matter. It does, it's paramount. Poxy feckin designers.
p.s. Queen Rania has nothing to do with this post but it is my duty as chief consort to always associate myself with beautiful women in your memory.
I agree. After years of waiting for the computer to load, waiting for dvds to load, having to watch the stop-piracy thingy... I just want to be able to sit down, switch something on, end of story.
ReplyDeletepain in the ass
For me, in order:
ReplyDelete1. high reliability
2. high quality
3. high speed
My actual buying habits of the last year:
1. high speed
2. high reliability
3. high quality
My goals for the coming year:
1. buy less high speed
2. create more high quality
3. give more high reliability
Just to point out for anyone who missed out, MA likes it fast and doesn't care for the quality.
ReplyDelete:)
ReplyDeleteTib, lol,lmao,rrfl etc etc. I so didn't cop that (fnar) when I wrote it. I need to innuendo-proof my posts in future.
ReplyDeleteTib? Milan? Get a room.
ReplyDeleteTib? Milan? Get a room.
ReplyDelete