# Old (lack of?) technologies that are just frickin' better than the new tech **URL:** \ **Category:** In My Humble Opinion\ **Created:** [June 29, 2012, 12:56am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/old-lack-of-technologies-that-are-just-frickin-better-than-the-new-tech/626647 "2012-06-29T00:56:01Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 4
**Author:** ![Bosda\_Di\_Chi\_of\_Tricor](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bosda_di_chi_of_tricor/32/16845_2.png) [@Bosda\_Di\_Chi\_of\_Tricor](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bosda_Di_Chi_of_Tricor)\ **Post date:** [June 30, 2012, 2:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/old-lack-of-technologies-that-are-just-frickin-better-than-the-new-tech/626647/61 "2012-06-30T14:14:20Z")
> [@Spectre\_of\_Pithecanthropus](#): > > Right with you on this one. Synthetic fiber jackets make the wearers look like little kids, IMHO. Then again, they probably are better at actually keeping one warm and dry, so one has to consider that. Nope. Wool stays warm when wet. ---
**Author:** ![rsat3acr](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/a3d4f5/32.png) [@rsat3acr](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/rsat3acr)\ **Post date:** [July 1, 2012, 3:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/old-lack-of-technologies-that-are-just-frickin-better-than-the-new-tech/626647/62 "2012-07-01T15:47:45Z")
I liked the old fashoned yellowpages, you tell a lot from the ads. Online yellowpages aren’t worth a crap. ---
**Author:** ![Dag\_Otto](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/439d5e/32.png) [@Dag\_Otto](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dag_Otto)\ **Post date:** [July 1, 2012, 4:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/old-lack-of-technologies-that-are-just-frickin-better-than-the-new-tech/626647/63 "2012-07-01T16:41:51Z")
> [@Spectre\_of\_Pithecanthropus](#): > > They do sell both wired and wireless (Bluetooth) headsets to solve this problem. I don’t have one of [these,](http://www.thinkgeek.com/electronics/cell-phone/8928/) but I think it’s a pretty good idea - better than a Cell-mate. ---
**Author:** ![MeanOldLady](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/meanoldlady/32/10737_2.png) [@MeanOldLady](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MeanOldLady)\ **Post date:** [July 1, 2012, 5:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/old-lack-of-technologies-that-are-just-frickin-better-than-the-new-tech/626647/64 "2012-07-01T17:35:16Z")
> [@Shalmanese](#): > > It used to be you could change a television channel in milliseconds. Nowadays, it takes multiple seconds. When you were bored, you could flip through channels one by one, spending a few seconds on each channel until something caught your eye. Trying to do that now is a painful process. Am I missing something? Why is it taking you so long to change the channel? > [@Dag\_Otto](#): > > I don’t have one of [these,](http://www.thinkgeek.com/electronics/cell-phone/8928/) but I think it’s a pretty good idea - better than a Cell-mate. That is better than a Cell-Mate, and not just because Cell-mate is the lamest thing there is; that thing is legitimately cool. ---
**Author:** ![Gagundathar](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/a183cd/32.png) [@Gagundathar](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gagundathar)\ **Post date:** [July 1, 2012, 5:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/old-lack-of-technologies-that-are-just-frickin-better-than-the-new-tech/626647/65 "2012-07-01T17:52:25Z")
I agree with **MeanOldLady** (who I’ll bet isn’t either mean or old) about that CellMate contraption. Every time I see an idiotic gadget, I think of what P. T. Barnum said oh so many years ago. The retro handset from ThinkGeek IS pretty dang cool, though. ---
**Author:** ![Nametag](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/nametag/32/406_2.png) [@Nametag](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Nametag)\ **Post date:** [July 1, 2012, 7:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/old-lack-of-technologies-that-are-just-frickin-better-than-the-new-tech/626647/66 "2012-07-01T19:17:46Z")
What I miss isn’t the volume knob – it’s the tuning knob. _I_ will decide which station I’m tuning in, you useless blob of silicon, not you! I want to spin a knob to go across the dial, and fiddle it to receive a signal that’s a little too weak for your crappy programming to identify it. Whose Brilliant Idea was it to replace this useful function with buttons, for fuck’s sake?! Yes, I know that the IC/FS/DSP does a better job than the old LO/VC/POT, but why can’t the form follow the function? ---
**Author:** ![Digital\_is\_the\_new\_Analog](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/a88e4f/32.png) [@Digital\_is\_the\_new\_Analog](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Digital_is_the_new_Analog)\ **Post date:** [July 1, 2012, 7:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/old-lack-of-technologies-that-are-just-frickin-better-than-the-new-tech/626647/67 "2012-07-01T19:32:36Z")
> [@MeanOldLady](#): > > I think there may have been a similar thread once before, but fuck if I can find it. I had a similar [thread](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=586238)about the downside of digital technology..maybe that’s what you’re remembering. > [@Tastes\_of\_Chocolate](#): > > Analog over-the-air TV signals. > > Digital is fine, as long as you live in a populated area, and it’s not raining or snowing. > But as soon as you are in the boonies, or stuff is falling out of the air, the signal deteriorates, and then it’s gone. Sure, the old analog signals would get snowy, but you could still watch it. This was the comment I made in [Where’d your username come from?](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=585582) that prompted my thread. > [@MeanOldLady](#): > > Am I missing something? Why is it taking you so long to change the channel? Instead of just attenuating to a new channel, we now have to do a bunch of signalling and decoding. I’m not sure of the details..I should ask my friend who designs cable boxes. -D/a ---
**Author:** ![silenus](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/silenus/32/166_2.png) [@silenus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/silenus)\ **Post date:** [July 1, 2012, 7:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/old-lack-of-technologies-that-are-just-frickin-better-than-the-new-tech/626647/68 "2012-07-01T19:41:31Z")
> [@Spectre\_of\_Pithecanthropus](#): > > They do sell both wired and wireless (Bluetooth) headsets to solve this problem. I refuse to _help_ the Universe Borgify me. When I become God-King of the World, some of the first people recycled are going to be those wearing Bluetooth headsets/earpieces. ---
**Author:** ![AncientHumanoid](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ancienthumanoid/32/278_2.png) [@AncientHumanoid](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/AncientHumanoid)\ **Post date:** [July 1, 2012, 7:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/old-lack-of-technologies-that-are-just-frickin-better-than-the-new-tech/626647/69 "2012-07-01T19:46:52Z")
> [@MeanOldLady](#): > > Oh god, yes, this! I keep saying I’m going to head down to Walgreens (or wherever) one day and get prints of the photos on my memory card, but that is a lie. For shame. Best of both worlds: create a Walgreens (or CVS, or Sams, etc…) photo account online. Upload your pic files from your computer or device to their service. Order physical prints to either be picked up or mailed to you. Sit around and touch real prints of your digital photography. Cheap (sometimes 9 cents a print), easy (you don’t have to GO anywhere), good (prints are decent quality, at least they are if your photography was good in the first place). ---
**Author:** ![Ludovic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/7ab992/32.png) [@Ludovic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ludovic)\ **Post date:** [July 1, 2012, 7:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/old-lack-of-technologies-that-are-just-frickin-better-than-the-new-tech/626647/70 "2012-07-01T19:51:35Z")
I’ll second the delays with digital channel switching and also mention the delays with cell phones. It seems that every time I talk to someone on a cell phone there is an awkward moment where we talk over each other and then both start again at the same time, and that rarely happened with land lines. When you add that to lack of reception, I’d switch back and actually drop my cell phone and only get cheapo cell phones for when I’m going on a trip except that a land line is actually twice as expensive as a cell phone for me. ---
**Author:** ![Skald\_the\_Rhymer](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/ecccb3/32.png) [@Skald\_the\_Rhymer](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Skald_the_Rhymer)\ **Post date:** [July 1, 2012, 7:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/old-lack-of-technologies-that-are-just-frickin-better-than-the-new-tech/626647/71 "2012-07-01T19:52:49Z")
> [@MeanOldLady](#): > > This is not even a joke. Please kill me if I ever wear one of those. I have made a note in your file to that effect. I can’t kill you myself because of the no-hitting-girls rule so I will have to subcontract out the job. To the OP, I will agree with whoever suggested paper calendars, appointment books, and address books. I can’t stand the electronic version of any of those. Of course, I’m a Luddite in many ways. I also think that keyless entry and keyless start on automobiles are both incredibly stupid ideas. For that matter, I would be happy to have manual windows and locks. ---
**Author:** ![AncientHumanoid](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ancienthumanoid/32/278_2.png) [@AncientHumanoid](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/AncientHumanoid)\ **Post date:** [July 1, 2012, 7:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/old-lack-of-technologies-that-are-just-frickin-better-than-the-new-tech/626647/72 "2012-07-01T19:54:26Z")
I would rather hand someone a small photo album of my stuff than hand over my tablet to them or have to scroll thru my stuff on my tablet for them. I do use a portable digital portfolio for my professional stuff, tho. It has a 7" screen. I also carry a 16x20" leather portfolio with matted 11x14" enlargements for up selling enlargements. (All my photos are taken with a DSLR now) Someone upthread mentioned a typewriter for addressing envelopes. YES YES YES. Also for title cards on 3x5 index cards. Much easier and quicker for me to do it the old way. The new way, I have to check the format, the label size, make sure I put the envelope in the right way, make sure I oriented it as landscape or portrait, etc… ---
**Author:** ![MeanOldLady](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/meanoldlady/32/10737_2.png) [@MeanOldLady](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MeanOldLady)\ **Post date:** [July 1, 2012, 8:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/old-lack-of-technologies-that-are-just-frickin-better-than-the-new-tech/626647/73 "2012-07-01T20:00:39Z")
> [@Digital\_is\_the\_new\_Analog](#): > > Instead of just attenuating to a new channel, we now have to do a bunch of signalling and decoding. I’m not sure of the details..I should ask my friend who designs cable boxes. But how long does that take, though? A tenth of a second? When I had cable, I don’t remember channel surfing taking a particularly long time. Maybe I was just used to it and didn’t notice. > [@NoClueBoy](#): > > Best of both worlds: create a Walgreens (or CVS, or Sams, etc…) photo account online. Upload your pic files from your computer or device to their service. Order physical prints to either be picked up or mailed to you. Sit around and touch real prints of your digital photography. > > Cheap (sometimes 9 cents a print), easy (you don’t have to GO anywhere), good (prints are decent quality, at least they are if your photography was good in the first place). Brilliant! Even Captain Lazy here can do that. Thanks for the suggestion. ---
**Author:** ![handsomeharry](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/e9c0ed/32.png) [@handsomeharry](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/handsomeharry)\ **Post date:** [July 1, 2012, 8:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/old-lack-of-technologies-that-are-just-frickin-better-than-the-new-tech/626647/74 "2012-07-01T20:13:14Z")
> [@rsat3acr](#): > > I liked the old fashoned yellowpages, you tell a lot from the ads. Online yellowpages aren’t worth a crap. AND, the white pages. ---
**Author:** ![Spectre\_of\_Pithecanthropus](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/spectre_of_pithecanthropus/32/12343_2.png) [@Spectre\_of\_Pithecanthropus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Spectre_of_Pithecanthropus)\ **Post date:** [July 1, 2012, 9:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/old-lack-of-technologies-that-are-just-frickin-better-than-the-new-tech/626647/75 "2012-07-01T21:56:47Z")
> [@Suil\_Dubh](#): > > I prefer disposable film cameras to digital cameras for the sole reason that you can’t see the picture you just took until you actually get the film developed. For me, it’s much more fun that way. Speaking of film, being shown actual, projected, reel-to-reel films in school was way the hell better than a VHS tape shown on a 19-inch TV at the head of the classroom. OTOH, modern DVD and LED screen tech may have surpassed the old films, by now. ---
**Author:** ![JackieLikesVariety](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jackielikesvariety/32/296_2.png) [@JackieLikesVariety](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JackieLikesVariety)\ **Post date:** [July 2, 2012, 2:00am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/old-lack-of-technologies-that-are-just-frickin-better-than-the-new-tech/626647/76 "2012-07-02T02:00:33Z")
once my Keurig died instead of replacing it or going back to a drip coffee pot I got a perculator - the coffee is very hot and I love the noise and smell of perking.🙂 ---
**Author:** ![njtt](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/ecd19e/32.png) [@njtt](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/njtt)\ **Post date:** [July 2, 2012, 3:10am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/old-lack-of-technologies-that-are-just-frickin-better-than-the-new-tech/626647/77 "2012-07-02T03:10:38Z")
> [@MeanOldLady](#): > > But how long does that take, though? A tenth of a second? When I had cable, I don’t remember channel surfing taking a particularly long time. Maybe I was just used to it and didn’t notice. This might be too new of a problem for you to have run across it yet. The issue is not with cable. I think it is with flat screen TVs or maybe over-the-air digital TV. About a year ago I had cable and an old CRT TV and it was plenty fast. Now I have a new flat screen and am getting digital over-the-air and yes, it takes a a couple of seconds to switch between channels, quite enough to take the fun out of channel surfing. It also takes several seconds to start up, even from standby. I think its electronics are booting up, like a computer. It is almost like the old days of valve sets that needed time to warm up. ---
**Author:** ![Polerius](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/d78d45/32.png) [@Polerius](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Polerius)\ **Post date:** [July 2, 2012, 3:51am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/old-lack-of-technologies-that-are-just-frickin-better-than-the-new-tech/626647/78 "2012-07-02T03:51:40Z")
> [@MeanOldLady](#): > > I think there may have been a similar thread once before, but fuck if I can find it. Here’s one I started a couple months ago: [What things were quantifiably better in the past?](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=647374) One thing I noticed recently is that the fastest commercial airplane is now much slower than it used to be. The Concorde could fly from London to NYC in, I think, in around 3 hours, while current planes take two to three times as long. It’s weird when we go backwards in terms of technological abilities. ---
**Author:** ![scratch\_llll](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9fc348/32.png) [@scratch\_llll](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/scratch_llll)\ **Post date:** [July 2, 2012, 4:46am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/old-lack-of-technologies-that-are-just-frickin-better-than-the-new-tech/626647/79 "2012-07-02T04:46:13Z")
I can sit on a book or throw it across a room without worrying about breaking anything expensive. I can flip to a part I want to reread quicker. If I leave it somewhere then I can buy another for a small fee. Months later I can glance at a book on a shelf and decide to flip it open to an inspirational passage. I can forget it in a hammock during a storm and just dry it in the sun to continue reading. I can love it as a thing to touch and smell and admire visually. Never will a book be replaced by anything else in my heart. Ummm the new nightlight Kindle screens are convenient though. ---
**Author:** ![panache45](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/panache45/32/64_2.png) [@panache45](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/panache45)\ **Post date:** [July 2, 2012, 5:44am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/old-lack-of-technologies-that-are-just-frickin-better-than-the-new-tech/626647/80 "2012-07-02T05:44:51Z")
Every single packaged food product does not need a zip-lock and/or “tear here” instructions. Same goes for “press thumb here for E-Z spout” or “lift corner here for E-Z open.” Give me a plain bag or box, and let me decide the best way to open it. And LP packaging was a lot easier to open than CD packaging. I was just in the hospital, and the TV remote had one button. Tap it to go to the next channel, hold it down for ON or OFF. The problem was, there was no other way to get to a channel. To go back just one channel, you had to keep tapping the button hundreds of times. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/old-lack-of-technologies-that-are-just-frickin-better-than-the-new-tech/626647.md?page=3) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/old-lack-of-technologies-that-are-just-frickin-better-than-the-new-tech/626647.md?page=5)