so dh and I had this big row this morning about him calling the BT Vision box 'an intuitive interface'

[Cappuccino]

I know that makes him sound like a geeky tosser and believe me, that was a good part of my argument

but the other part was that it's wrong. He said it was intuitive because it was easy to use, you could quickly find what you want

but the box isn't intuitive, is it? the menu isn't intuitive? it can't tell what you want, you do that - you might be able to use your intuition to use the thing (this all started because my mother can use it, but it doesn't have intuition of it's own

I hate jargon at the best of times but this just seems wrong

I don't care how many of his geeky mates use it

I am willing to be proved wrong

As jargon goes, I don't much dislike this. I can see your objection, but I suppose the ascription of intuitiveness to the box has good poetic precedents in all the examples of the pathetic fallacy.

We do the intuiting, but the box matches our intuitions.

There are other similar ascriptions made to technology, which we've gor uused to: We might say 'it is a commonsense interface', when actually the box has no common sense.

i agree its wrong. the DESIGN of the menu system may be intuitive but the box itself or the menu isnt intuitive.

(Staff at an internet design company which I once had to work with confessed to me that they used to have competitions with one another to see who could get the phrase 'multi-hierarchical taxonomy' most frequently into a meeting with clients.)

isnt it grammatically wrong

the INTERFACE itself isnt intuitive

cappy rofl btw you do sound like me sometimes

It's not ungrammatical; it's poetic, innit?

threadworm "I suppose the ascription of intuitiveness to the box has good poetic precedents in all the examples of the pathetic fallacy."

god he would love you

I get your point, I am just sick of it. The other night he was talking about his 'skill set' ffs

if you are talking to your wife you talk about 'the things you can do' surely

it is like living with Metal Fecking Mickey sometimes

( Enid)

Well technically it is perhaps wrong, although we regularly ascribe anthropomorphic adjectives to various items, for example, "a practical tool", "a useful device" (or "a commonsense interface"). Objects are simply designed to ergonomically fulfil their purpose so, in fact, any adjective which ascribes additional characteristics to them is wrong. If you wish to pursue your argument, you could really only describe any object in this context as "well designed for the task which it is intended to fulfil".

fab cestlavie

I shall start doing that

all the time

it is a great idea

I hate all this jargon generally. Actually 'interface' gets me down much more than 'intuitive'.

There must be a funny random jargon generator somewhere on the web that someone could link to?

DP gets like this about his work (he's a linguist) and it's bloody irritating. He'll discuss DS's speech development in terms of "voiceless fricatives" and garden-pathing" and various academic terms. It's just showing off. I once knew a nurse who would talk about your "thorax" to show off that she knew the proper words. Ack!

With DP I just try to match him at it to take the wind out of his sails. I'm not an academic, so if I can do it too, his posturing means nowt. Ha ha!

As for intuitive though, I think - within the realms of poncy jargon - it's not that wrong in itself, as a term. Your DH using it though - and "skill set" aaarrrgggh! - that's worth a row IMO.

Should make for some interesting conversations Cappucino!

"Do you like our wonderful new car honey?"

"Yes, dear. It is indeed very well designed for task which it intended to fulfil."

Capp when he spoke to you of his skill sets, perhaps he was 'ironising his narrative'. I used to know someone who made use of that phrase more often than I liked.

you have no idea how much pleasure 'ironising his narrative' would give him

I shan't tell him about it

ha ha ha

Well, whether it's right or wrong, it's obfuscating bollocks, isn't it? If he meant it's easy to use, he should have said, "It's easy to use."

yes

yes

that is exactly it

in fact he had already said it was easy to use, but then he had to add that as well