Post #365,455
10/23/12 10:51:59 AM
10/23/12 10:52:30 AM
|
The Verge's Windows 8 Review is up
Interesting stuff.
I was highly amused by the notion that "there's a steep learning curve" in finding the charms bar.
<old git>
When ah were a lad, we applied the term "steep learning curve" to things that were actually hard, like learning obscure realtime languages with horrific syntax like RTL/2, efficient-to-the-point-of-mental-destruction 3D apps like Blender or so-vast-you-don't-know-where-to-start pro drafting apps like AutoCAD, not "finding a menu, like you were shown in the video you saw when you made your account".
Kids these days, etc.
Get off my lawn.
</old git>
Edit: Heh, a link would be nice, I suppose. Here: http://www.theverge..../windows-8-review
Edited by pwhysall
Oct. 23, 2012, 10:52:30 AM EDT
|
Post #365,456
10/23/12 11:28:42 AM
|
The "learning curve" should be retired.
Some argue that you want a steep learning curve - it means you quickly go from nothing to being able to use the tool. So the X-axis would be time and the Y-axis is knowledge. Others argue that you want a gradual learning curve - it means that you make incremental progress at a reasonably fixed rate, so that you can get there in a systematic way without "quantum leaps" (another weird term). So the X-axis is time and the Y-axis is effort (or something similar).
It doesn't add clarity to use the term "learning curve".
If people want to say: "the system is different but easy to discover the ways to use it", they should say so.
If people want to say: "the system is different and difficult to learn how to use", they should say so.
</rant>
Cheers,
Scott.
|
Post #365,460
10/23/12 12:32:55 PM
|
Got the axes wrong
X is how well you can use the system, Y is how much you know. A steep curve (near 0 on the X-axis) means you need to learn a lot to become even minimally effective.
--
Drew
|
Post #365,461
10/23/12 2:07:08 PM
|
Having made my living with learning curves . . .
. . for many years, this is how it was laid out. I still have the book of tables I used - we didn't have computers in those days.
X axis (horizontal) - total number of units produced.
Y axis (vertical) - total time invested per unit produced.
So if you start high at the left, you hope to decline rapidly (steep curve) - unless you're on a cost plus contract.
Of course, the ideal is a very shallow learning curve, starting low and ending a bit lower. Takes a lot of the risk out of estimating the total cost.
|
Post #365,462
10/23/12 2:10:49 PM
|
Hmm, backwards from (current) common usage
People talk about climbing the learning curve, and a steep curve is harder to climb.
--
Drew
|
Post #365,477
10/23/12 8:51:04 PM
|
No, they just don't understand learning curves.
You don't climb learning curves - you start at the top (most difficult) and slide down (you hope).
|
Post #365,464
10/23/12 3:38:51 PM
|
I think those are "experience curves".
E.g. http://en.wikipedia...._experience_curve
Given your previous experience, that would seem to be a perfect fit.
Cheers,
Scott.
|
Post #365,478
10/23/12 9:01:09 PM
|
Yea, but . . .
. . note that they use "Experience Curve" as a "disambiguation" of the major heading "Learning Curve" - and the other definitions are TV shows or bands.
Calling it an "Experience Curve" is probably a recent attempt to overcome the total misuse of the term "Learning Curve" in current speech.
We always called it "Learning Curve", and the government auditors called it "Learning Curve", and my book of tables is titled "Cumulative Average Learning".
|
Post #365,463
10/23/12 3:37:25 PM
|
There are lots and lots of variations.
That's another reason why the term is bad. ;-)
http://en.wikipedia....urve#Common_terms
Common terms
The familiar expression "steep learning curve" may refer to either of two aspects of a pattern in which the marginal rate of required resource investment is initially low, perhaps even decreasing at the very first stages, but eventually increases without bound.
Early uses of the metaphor focused on the pattern's positive aspect, namely the potential for quick progress in learning (as measured by, e.g., memory accuracy or the number of trials required to obtain a desired result)[5] at the introductory or elementary stage.[6] Over time, however, the metaphor has become more commonly used to focus on the pattern's negative aspect, namely the difficulty of learning once one gets beyond the basics of a subject.[citation needed]
In the former case, the "steep[ness]" metaphor is inspired by the initially high rate of increase featured by the function characterizing the overall amount learned versus total resources invested (or versus time when resource investment per unit time is held constant)Âin mathematical terms, the initially high positive absolute value of the first derivative of that function. In the latter case, the metaphor is inspired by the pattern's eventual behavior, i.e., its behavior at high values of overall resources invested (or of overall time invested when resource investment per unit time is held constant), namely the high rate of increase in the resource investment required if the next item is to be learnedÂin other words, the eventually always-high, always-positive absolute value and the eventually never-decreasing status of the first derivative of that function. In turn, those properties of the latter function dictate that the function measuring the rate of learning per resource unit invested (or per unit time when resource investment per unit time is held constant) has a horizontal asymptote at zero, and thus that the overall amount learned, while never "plateauing" or decreasing, increases more and more slowly as more and more resources are invested.
This difference in emphasis has led to confusion and disagreements even among learned people.[7]
FWIW.
Cheers,
Scott.
|
Post #365,468
10/23/12 4:31:20 PM
|
Yes. This.
Another good example is learning a new musical instrument.
I've recently picked up Rocksmith: having not played guitar before, my existing musical skill gave me a small boost, but I didn't get far before the real learning kicked in and everything simply got quite a lot harder. I expressed some concern to an experienced musician about difficulties fretting with the bundled guitar and he said to give it six months. Now that's a learning curve!
Wade.
|
Post #365,459
10/23/12 12:30:25 PM
|
Geezer
--
Drew
|
