Do you find a tablet useful for work?
-
@scottalanmiller said:
If our goal is only "that it works" and not "that we are making the best decisions", IT becomes pretty simple and IT pros are no longer needed, with rare exceptions. IT's big value is not getting things to work, but to getting better solutions, safer and cheaper than "just working."
Can't be said much better than that.
Make it work in the best, most cost effective solution possible.
+1 SAM
-
@Minion-Queen said:
Most of them are sales people so that is their main machine. In the main office they have the docks for them and big monitors etc. to connect them to. They really like them for their portability.
I understand using tablets in sales when you are on the go, but it is hard for me to imagine docking the tablet while at the office. I've always had an iPad or tablet for on-the-go purposes. In real estate, I use a laptop for searching, initial set up and forms and the tablet for field work (property details and pictures, comps, maps, etc). At Waterford, we use tablets for off-site demos (at trade shows, client lunches, events and such). We don't always use it, but it can definitely be useful for when someone needs to see a quick visual on email and file archiving. The tablet is easier to hand over rather than a laptop.
-
@scottalanmiller said:
@dafyre said:
FOr $1,000 you can get a decent desktop replacement of a laptop around 15" in size.
Your ultra books aren't going to be much bigger than 15" in most cases anyway, right?
Quite a bit less than $1K these days.
I paid $800 for my Probook 650 G1. Great device - true it's not an ultrabook, but I wasn't going for ultrabook.
-
@scottalanmiller said:
If our goal is only "that it works" and not "that we are making the best decisions", IT becomes pretty simple and IT pros are no longer needed, with rare exceptions. IT's big value is not getting things to work, but to getting better solutions, safer and cheaper than "just working."
If the end-users are happy with what we are doing, that is quite possibly a sign that we are making good (political?) decisions and that things are working well, and not "just working". We all know how much politics can and often does come into play, especially in businesses.
In the What is best for the business, I agree. But to a large (or perhaps only some) degree, that involves keeping our end-users (relatively) happy and allowing them to have equipment that is useful to them.
-
@dafyre said:
@scottalanmiller said:
If our goal is only "that it works" and not "that we are making the best decisions", IT becomes pretty simple and IT pros are no longer needed, with rare exceptions. IT's big value is not getting things to work, but to getting better solutions, safer and cheaper than "just working."
If the end-users are happy with what we are doing, that is quite possibly a sign that we are making good (political?) decisions and that things are working well, and not "just working". We all know how much politics can and often does come into play, especially in businesses.
In the What is best for the business, I agree. But to a large (or perhaps only some) degree, that involves keeping our end-users (relatively) happy and allowing them to have equipment that is useful to them.
I'm not implying that end users should not be happy. I'm only saying that happy end users alone does not indicate a good solution. It could, in some cases, indicate a broken solution because the users wanted an excuse not to work. Or a slow solution because they enjoy the extra coffee breaks. Or that they just like that the solution is fun to use but is vastly too costly.
Or it can just be that they are "happy" but not "as happy as they could be." Basically, using "users are happy" as a checkbox tells us very little. It's almost certainly true that users (at least good ones) will be happy when solutions are good, but they may also be happy when solutions are not good or not as good as they should be.
So I'm not suggesting in any way that we avoid happy users, only that happy users does not alone indicate a good solution.
-
@scottalanmiller Does that paragraph make you happy happy? lol.
I do agree with that though.
-
@scottalanmiller @dafyre - user happiness can be thought of as corporate lube. Keeps the gears turning, lowers friction and reduces squeaking.
-
@MattSpeller Yea, that is kinda what I was getting at, I think.
-
I've had more success designing mediocre systems that the users love than designing brilliant systems that users hate and refuse to use. Having a "users are happy" checkbox is essential for any project. At the same time, I always go into a project pointing out that I'm never going to be able to make everyone happy and the company just needs to deal with that.
-
@Carnival-Boy said:
I've had more success designing mediocre systems that the users love than designing brilliant systems that users hate and refuse to use.
Should you really define a system as brilliant if it doesn't service the needs of the users?
I'm not advocating that user happiness isn't important, only that the final result has to be viewed holistically.
-
@scottalanmiller said:
Should you really define a system as brilliant if it doesn't service the needs of the users?
Yes. If they sacked the users and replaced them with new ones then my brilliant systems would save the company a fortune!
-
@Carnival-Boy said in Do you find a tablet useful for work?:
@scottalanmiller said:
Should you really define a system as brilliant if it doesn't service the needs of the users?
Yes. If they sacked the users and replaced them with new ones then my brilliant systems would save the company a fortune!
And potentially even more if they sacked the users and didn't replace them! Now that really saves the money.
