From: "Rich" 

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0180_01C5835F.B44EEBD0
Content-Type: text/plain;
        charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

   I think you may be mixing two related areas.  I don't believe people =
value time linearly.  The difference between one second and two second =
response times can be very noticable and have a significant affect on = the
user's perception and satisfaction.  In my earlier example I had the = user
than take 60 seconds on consuming the results before repeating the =
operation.  At that level the difference is 61 seconds vs. 62 seconds.  =
It may be a valid business decision that 61 seconds is not worth much =
more in cost than 62 seconds.  The user of the faster system though may =
have measurably higher satisfaction.  Many users, particularly for =
personal use, may value satisfaction more highly than you or maybe your =
satisfaction is high enough.  My point is that this satisfaction from =
responsiveness is distinct from the time (limited or not) spent on a =
task.  I believe this is one reason people desire and enjoy ever faster =
computers.

Rich

  "Don Hills"  wrote in message =
news:w3hzCtgaXeAb092yn{at}attglobal.net...
  In article , "Rich"  wrote:
  >   I can't speak for everyone but I expect ordinary users value a CPU
  >for its peak performance and responsiveness not the steady state and
  >throughput.  When you make a claim that some specific speed is all =
that
  >they need you are making a claim on the value of that user's time.  =
When
  >a user clicks a button or similar, they want the computer respond
  >immediately.

  Agreed. "Transient" response as you defined above was my criteria for
  "fast enough" in my post. One reason I've felt no need to upgrade my
  mail/news machine is because it is responds essentially instantly to =
my
  input. I can be very productive with it, and I do value my time - I =
have a
  limited amount of time in a day to spend on mail and news. The faster =
I can
  do it, the more value I get from it.

  --=20
  Don Hills    (dmhills at attglobaldotnet)     Wellington, New Zealand

------=_NextPart_000_0180_01C5835F.B44EEBD0
Content-Type: text/html;
        charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable








   I think
you may be mixing =
two related=20
areas.  I don't believe people value time linearly.  The
= difference=20
between one second and two second response times can be very noticable = and have=20
a significant affect on the user's perception and satisfaction.  In = my=20
earlier example I had the user than take 60 seconds on consuming the = results=20
before repeating the operation.  At that level the difference is
61 = seconds=20
vs. 62 seconds.  It may be a valid business decision that 61 =
seconds is not=20
worth much more in cost than 62 seconds.  The user of the faster = system=20
though may have measurably higher satisfaction.  Many users, =
particularly=20
for personal use, may value satisfaction more highly than you or maybe = your=20
satisfaction is high enough.  My point is that this satisfaction = from=20
responsiveness is distinct from the time (limited or not) spent on a =
task. =20
I believe this is one reason people desire and enjoy ever faster=20
computers.
 
Rich
 

  "Don Hills" <dmhills{at}attglobal.net>">mailto:dmhills{at}attglobal.net">dmhills{at}attglobal.net>
=
wrote in=20
  message news:w3hzCtgaXeAb092yn{at}attg=
lobal.net...In=20
  article <42ce0b78{at}w3.nls.net>,=20">mailto:42ce0b78{at}w3.nls.net">42ce0b78{at}w3.nls.net>,=20
  "Rich" <{at}>
wrote:>   I can't speak for everyone =
but I=20
  expect ordinary users value a CPU>for its peak performance and=20
  responsiveness not the steady state
and>throughput.  When =
you make=20
  a claim that some specific speed is all that>they need you are =
making a=20
  claim on the value of that user's time.  When>a user =
clicks a=20
  button or similar, they want the computer=20
  respond>immediately.Agreed.
"Transient" response as you =
defined=20
  above was my criteria for"fast enough" in my post.
One reason I've =
felt no=20
  need to upgrade mymail/news machine is because it is responds =
essentially=20
  instantly to myinput. I can be very productive with it, and I do =
value my=20
  time - I have alimited amount of time in a day to spend on mail =
and news.=20
  The faster I cando it, the more value I get from
it.-- =
Don=20
  Hills    (dmhills at =
attglobaldotnet)    =20
  Wellington, New Zealand

------=_NextPart_000_0180_01C5835F.B44EEBD0--

--- BBBS/NT v4.01 Flag-5