>General public has probably been sold on the potential & novelty of the device, without realizing how little there is to it (feature wise).
There is an outrageous amount to it, feature wise. Voice is the holy grail for a pretty large amount of the public, and it is finally there.
The setup is surprisingly unintuitive (even the simple step to connect to a specific wifi network is beyond many users, and it is notable that Google Home on the same device just does it by itself), but I'm sure the techie niece will do it for most.
I was impressed by how easy it was to connect to WiFi, download app, hit connect to WiFi. All instructions were included on a piece of paper the size of a business card
> but I'm sure the techie niece will do it for most.
For most it would probably instead be a techie nephew. Very cool that you (I’m assuming) have a techie niece though! Always great to see that sort of thing.
I'm all for that, but the parent/GP took it a step further by stating a niece - the non-"typical" - would do it for "most", and I just don't think that's an accurate implication for most at all, based on anecdotal experiences in real life & on the internet, and also based on statistics.
I suppose that's a valid interpretation, but again, the purpose of the phrasing is to (slightly, help) change the status quo, so most of us are not batting an eye if it doesn't 100% reflect the status quo; the commenter may or may not have meant to collude 'most' with the non-typical, but it literally makes no difference.
If it doesn't really make sense, it does make a difference, and certain wording can actually have the opposite effect and turn people away from the cause - even if they support it, like I do. I'm a huge proponent of "girls can do anything guys can do" and not pushing gender stereotypes on girls, but the GP's very presumptive wording came across as trying really hard to change the status quo, as well as exclusionary, when it could have been done much more naturally and subtly:
> "the techie niece/nephew will do it for most"
(being inclusive of both genders when obviously only the one gender, male, really reasonably applies; doesn't tend to offend anyone and brings them over to your cause because you're not making it look like you're trying to unreasonably exclude - this is probably the most ideal choice of wording)
or even just removing the "for most" (since it's completely inaccurate and very presumptive)
> "the techie niece will do it"
But I mean, techie girls do exist, but they're pretty rare. It's like saying "if most people simply asked their plumber, she'd agree to use more environmentally friendly chemical to unclog your drain". It's like really? Literally only 1.4% of plumbers are female [1], c'mon, stop trying so hard to push your agenda, it just turns people off and hurts your otherwise very worthy cause.
There is an outrageous amount to it, feature wise. Voice is the holy grail for a pretty large amount of the public, and it is finally there.
The setup is surprisingly unintuitive (even the simple step to connect to a specific wifi network is beyond many users, and it is notable that Google Home on the same device just does it by itself), but I'm sure the techie niece will do it for most.