As I understand it, fellow Daynoter Sjon comments below seems to be saying the answer to yesterday's problem with getting people to understand PCs is to not have any. That is, the answer is apparently to go back to using thin clients and centralized computers running, storing, and controlling all applications and its data.
There is much to be said for this approach. There is no need to install new software on each PC and the data is all stored on a central server. The need for user support can be reduced since everything is centralized and controlled by people who are trained to do so. In addition, using thin clients allows the creation of a virtual desktop in which you can login from any terminal anywhere on the network and see the same suite of applications and data that you have sitting at your desk. It's already being done as many people are using Microsoft's services: Hotmail and .Net.
So the answer is not necessarily a choice between one or the other. There is value in both.
But for me, they can take my PC when they pry it from my cold dead fingers. With all due respect to the people who toil everyday trying to support users who are dangerous with the tools they already have, the answer to ignorance is not more ignorance.
The power of personal computing is a distributed power. It is democratic. It is entrusting the user to understand better what they need to do their jobs than a well-intentioned technician in an office two towers away. It is a realization that centralized planning, for the most part, has not and does not work. It gives voice to the user in a time where the opportunity for conversation is in mortal danger.
No, the answer to yesterday's problem is not to take away the very tools needed to do our jobs. The answer is education. Teach people how to use PCs. Then teach them to think about the processes they apply during the workday and reflect on how they could be modified/deleted to leverage the power of the PC. In other words, how to become not only faster in processing what they do, but doing it in a smarter way. A way that streamlines or totally eliminates steps.
For example, cases filed in court used to be registered by writing their names in a ledger. If anyone wanted to know what was filed, you had to consult the ledger. When mainframes came along, applications were written to computerize this so that everyone who had access to the mainframe had access to this database. While this certainly was a Good Thing, productivity did not rise very much because all that was being done was transferring the process from one medium to another.
But productivity really soared when people had PCs on their desks and could use them to download the data and then fold, spindle and staple it into information that could be used. Where they could take data collecting dust and use it as fuel to power the engine of change. Where ad hoc queries could be done instantly rather than requiring a SQL programmer to code a request and return the result sometime later that year. All of sudden, information that could be used to make good decisions became available. But only by those who had the tools and the knowledge to use them.
In summary, there are applications and data that make sense to be on a centralized server. But at the same time, there are other applications and data that allow productivity gains only when located on a personal computer. What is needed is the knowledge, and perhaps some wisdom, to the determine which belongs where and how best to use it.
Aloha!
