×

Announcing: Slashdot Deals - Explore geek apps, games, gadgets and more. (what is this?)

Thank you!

We are sorry to see you leave - Beta is different and we value the time you took to try it out. Before you decide to go, please take a look at some value-adds for Beta and learn more about it. Thank you for reading Slashdot, and for making the site better!

Tech Replaces Diamonds As Girl's Best Friend

ScuttleMonkey posted more than 8 years ago | from the dog-still-man's-best-friend dept.

313

Ant writes to tell us that 'diamonds are no longer a girls best friend', at least according to a recent study commissioned by the Oxygen Network. From the article: "The survey, commissioned by U.S. cable television's Oxygen Network that is owned and operated by women, found the technology gender gap has virtually closed with the majority of women snapping up new technology and using it easily. Women were found on average to own 6.6 technology devices while men own 6.9, and four out of every five women felt comfortable using technology with 46 percent doing their own computer trouble-shooting."

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Great, just great... (4, Funny)

allanj (151784) | more than 8 years ago | (#15830095)

with 46 percent doing their own computer trouble-shooting
In my book, this means that 46 percent of the women we'll never have a chance of doing a favorable impression on. Not much of a chance to begin with, but now - no chance!

Re:Great, just great... (2, Funny)

earnest murderer (888716) | more than 8 years ago | (#15830126)

In my book, this means that 46 percent of the women we'll never have a chance of doing a favorable impression on. Not much of a chance to begin with, but now - no chance!

I suspect that 46 percent of women already had a "nerd" over to fix their computer.

Don't fret, as long as they don't talk there is still the other 54 percent.

Re:Great, just great... (0)

fbjon (692006) | more than 8 years ago | (#15830160)

I was under the impression that girls tend to be smarter than guys, but are discouraged by society (men)..?

Disclaimer: I'm a guy.

Re:Great, just great... (3, Funny)

tktk (540564) | more than 8 years ago | (#15830127)

You never had a chance with those 46 percent in any case.

Knowing how to run AV software never got any woman hot.

Re:Great, just great... (2, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15830222)

From my experiance in a university computer science department the vast majority of the women that are in the department (suprisingly there are actually in the double digits) are excellent at theory but absolutly have no idea how to write code. They usually pass classes that require coding by suducing one of the lonely male students into doing it for them.

In contrast there are three or four females that are excellent coders. It's probably safe to say that each person has a differant way of thinking about things which may allow him/her to work problems more/less sucessfully than others.

Re:Great, just great... (5, Funny)

WhodoVoodoo (319477) | more than 8 years ago | (#15830401)

Seduce you say? ...Which university was this?

Re:Great, just great... (1)

tacocat (527354) | more than 8 years ago | (#15830422)

I would tend to disagree with your assessment, but then I use a different definition of the work hot

When you can't log on to check your email or open you term paper in less than 10 minutes that is likely to get you pretty hot.

Vista comes to your Rescue! (2, Funny)

jkrise (535370) | more than 8 years ago | (#15830151)

Just wait a few months more... when all the lasses go in for the fancy, schmancy, kewl, cute, li'l stuff from Microsoft, you'll be busy Upgrading your Girlfriends to Linux. And it'll take a lifetime to sort out all those rpms, version conflicts, libraries, sockets etc. Enough time to develop your 'relationship', methinks!

Question is: How many Girlfriends can One Geek Man (TM) handle with his Linux expertise?

Re:Vista comes to your Rescue! (4, Funny)

Goth Biker Babe (311502) | more than 8 years ago | (#15830207)

Nah! As another poster said. Girls are more intelligent than boys. We buy Macs! We realise that time costs money too!

Re:Vista comes to your Rescue! (1)

Ohreally_factor (593551) | more than 8 years ago | (#15830410)

Doesn't upgrading your girlfriend to linux count as domestic abuse? Or at least provide a reasonable defense if she is charged with it?

Re:Great, just great... (4, Funny)

NMerriam (15122) | more than 8 years ago | (#15830162)

with 46 percent doing their own computer trouble-shooting

Well, geez, women are only 51% of the population, so that leaves only 5% of the women that we can impress with our intelligence!

Re:Great, just great... (2, Informative)

BungeBash (971979) | more than 8 years ago | (#15830460)

46% of 51% wouldn't that be about half of the 51%. meaning that about 50% of women can still be impressed with our intelligence>

Re:Great, just great... (2, Insightful)

Tatarize (682683) | more than 8 years ago | (#15830271)

What's worse... those are probably the better 46%.

Re:Great, just great... (0, Offtopic)

owlicks58 (560207) | more than 8 years ago | (#15830300)

Moooove!

That can't be right (5, Insightful)

Umbral Blot (737704) | more than 8 years ago | (#15830100)

I don't even think 46% of men do their own computer trouble shooting.

One possibility... (4, Insightful)

Chmcginn (201645) | more than 8 years ago | (#15830111)

Depending on how the question was phrased, it may have said something like "attempt" or "try", instead of "successful complete a troubleshooting task." I hate seeing results to a survey without seeing the survey, personally, for this exact reason.

As someone who spent time in tech support... (5, Funny)

Opportunist (166417) | more than 8 years ago | (#15830122)

I can say that about 100% of the male population try to solve their own computer related problems, with about 20% solving them, 20% not solving them and 60% making them worse. And those 60% being a VERY conservative estimate.

Re:As someone who spent time in tech support... (1)

Chmcginn (201645) | more than 8 years ago | (#15830137)

True, but in a survey, who's going to admit to having made the problems worse, eh?

Re:As someone who spent time in tech support... (4, Insightful)

Opportunist (166417) | more than 8 years ago | (#15830152)

After a while in support you learn that "nothing" is the second most used lie right after "the check's in the mail". If the caller is male, you may safely assume that he DID try to fix the problem and the fact that he still called you means that he DID make it worse, and that pretty much every possible setting has been twiddled and is now at some completely random value.

Re:As someone who spent time in tech support... (1)

giorgiofr (887762) | more than 8 years ago | (#15830283)

pretty much every possible setting has been twiddled and is now at some completely random value

LOL, reminds me of myself. At least I try to keep a mental list of what I've touched so I that can rollback edits. It's easy when you're "troubleshooting" something like a macro or a game crash. Less so when it's an Apache config...
Anyway, tinkering was supposed to be an ancient and honorable tradition. Is it not anymore?

Re:As someone who spent time in tech support... (3, Informative)

Ohreally_factor (593551) | more than 8 years ago | (#15830418)

Less so when it's an Apache config...

There's this cool new feature on computers now where you can save a file under a different name, then rename it back when you want to roll back. =) Don't tell me you really play around in httpd.conf without saving a copy! It takes all of 5 seconds!

Re:As someone who spent time in tech support... (1)

alxkit (941262) | more than 8 years ago | (#15830143)

source for those stats? (excluding members of own family)

Re:As someone who spent time in tech support... (1)

Opportunist (166417) | more than 8 years ago | (#15830150)

Countless hours with a headset pressing against my precious skull and weenies screaming "TEH INTARWEB IS BROKEN!"

Re:As someone who spent time in tech support... (1)

alxkit (941262) | more than 8 years ago | (#15830169)

two heads are better then one - true. i accept your data wholeheartedly.

Seems a bit misleading.. (2, Funny)

Murodese (991864) | more than 8 years ago | (#15830106)

The only troubleshooting women in my life do with their computers is spamming me for help, and I'm not sure that counts.

Re:Seems a bit misleading.. (1)

fbjon (692006) | more than 8 years ago | (#15830172)

Not quite, women ask for help first, but men try to do it themselves first by random twiddling.

Warning (4, Funny)

Atario (673917) | more than 8 years ago | (#15830110)

First joker to ask if one of those women's "technology devices" is waterproof and vibratory gets...um...well, modded heavily, probably.

Re:Warning (1)

Chmcginn (201645) | more than 8 years ago | (#15830119)

First joker to ask if one of those women's "technology devices" is waterproof and vibratory gets...um...well, modded heavily, probably.

In what direction?

Also, does it play MP3's?

Re:Warning (4, Funny)

RsG (809189) | more than 8 years ago | (#15830250)

Also, does it play MP3's?
The Apple brand ones do. However, the "nano" varient hasn't been a huge success.

The Microsoft version is larger, but there have been complaints about the power adapter and USB port getting in the way, and not being adequatly waterproofed. The Sony ones seem to have problems with DRM screwing the user (and not in the good way)... :-)

Re:Warning (2, Funny)

Ohreally_factor (593551) | more than 8 years ago | (#15830423)

So, you're saying that Sony has managed to get root to my girlfriend's box? Damn! I knew we should have been using condoms!

Re:Warning (1)

RsG (809189) | more than 8 years ago | (#15830486)

Just pray they don't start spawning any new processes. You wouldn't beleive how much resources they use, and they're notoriously difficult to get rid of - some take 18 years or more!

Plus, the box they get rooted on loses some of its performance...

Re:Warning (2, Funny)

stunt_penguin (906223) | more than 8 years ago | (#15830556)

Root [urbandictionary.com] kit takes on a different meaning in this context.

Root: Kiwi/Australian slang that is used in place of the more commonly used term "fuck."

Questionable statistic... (5, Insightful)

dark_requiem (806308) | more than 8 years ago | (#15830113)

with 46 percent doing their own computer trouble-shooting.

Based on personal experience, I can't imagine this is accurate. I seriously doubt that 46 percent of women or men do their own computer troubleshooting and repair. I can honestly say that most of the people I know own computers, and far less than 46 percent are anywhere near capable or knowledgable of even basic troubleshooting and repair tasks. I expect many /.ers have had a similar experience. The average computer user doesn't even know how to update their drivers. Hell, the average user doesn't even know what a driver is.

Besides, who conducts a survey comparing the preferences of men and women with a sample set of one group (men, in this case) half the size of the other. While I am by no means a statistician, it seems to me that you would use equaly sized data samples, or at least weight the sample sizes based on the percentage of the population as a whole. Based on my luck recently, I'm quite certain there are not twice as many women as men in this country.

Re:Questionable statistic... (1)

cnettel (836611) | more than 8 years ago | (#15830156)

Why are equally sized samples relevant? It seems to me that they were interested in the habits of women, but wanted some additional baseline for men. This way, they can create specific slices of women demographics while retaining some significance, but look at the group of men as a whole.

Re:Questionable statistic... (5, Funny)

kfg (145172) | more than 8 years ago | (#15830165)

Besides, who conducts a survey comparing the preferences of men and women with a sample set of one group (men, in this case) half the size of the other.

Someone who thinks that instant messaging is a "tech area"?

KFG

Re:Questionable statistic... (1)

kfg (145172) | more than 8 years ago | (#15830171)

Based on personal experience, I can't imagine this is accurate. I seriously doubt that 46 percent of women or men do their own computer troubleshooting and repair.

The results of the survey do support the idea that 46% of women do their own troubleshooting and repair.

They were asked for self assessment of their feelings.

KFG

Re:Questionable statistic... (3, Informative)

zalle (637380) | more than 8 years ago | (#15830391)

Statistical inference is not dependent on the "size" of the sample space - it is equally valid to infer things from data that may get values from an infinite, uncountable set as it is to do similar inferences from a population that only has 3 possible values, thanks to the central limit theorem. Furthermore, sample size and the "size" of the sample space have no connection. For the purposes of inference, a sample is either large enough or not, but it doesn't matter in the least if the population from which the sample is drawn is enormous in comparison. This is why for example opinion polls are valid with just a few thousand respondents: regardless of whether the U.S. has 3 or 300 million inhabitants who have a relevant opinion, 3000 is enough to form confidence intervals of very good accuracy.

In this particular case, it is completely irrelevant whether the 2 samples are even close to being the same size. While 700 is quite small (too small for accuracy), it has no connection to the other sample at all. The only thing that can then be said about the 2 inferences is that the one about women is almost certainly quite a bit more accurate.

Re:Questionable statistic... (2, Funny)

Oswald (235719) | more than 8 years ago | (#15830437)

The Central Limit Theorem is just that: a theorem. Why do you not give equal time and consideration to the Intelligent Distribution Theorem?

Re:Questionable statistic... (1)

Schraegstrichpunkt (931443) | more than 8 years ago | (#15830569)

Don't even go there.

Re:Questionable statistic... (1)

Ibag (101144) | more than 8 years ago | (#15830425)

Besides, who conducts a survey comparing the preferences of men and women with a sample set of one group (men, in this case) half the size of the other. While I am by no means a statistician, it seems to me that you would use equally sized data samples, or at least weight the sample sizes based on the percentage of the population as a whole.


I'm not a statistician, but I have taken enough statistics classes to know that this kind of sampling still works. The rough idea is that, while there might be different results for men and women, and while these differences mean that you can't get infer population average by merely taking the average over the entire group, you can get plenty of information from this kind of data, and with knowledge of the population, you can infer population averages.

Really, as long as you isolate the variables you want to look at and take enough people from each group, it really doesn't matter if your sample set looks anything like the population. Mathematics allows you to adjust this data easily.

Just as a quick example, assume that 10% of a million men and 20% of two million women sampled love popcorn. If there are 100 million men and 100 million women in your country, you can assume that 10 million men and 20 million women love popcorn, or 7.5% of the population. Of course, if there was some other significant factor that was ignored, like they only asked people from California, and Californians happen to not like popcorn as much as other people, then the statistics will less useful. That is why it is important to take large samples, so that the things you don't control for end up looking approximately like they do in the general population.

Re: silly point estimates... (1)

Xandar01 (612884) | more than 8 years ago | (#15830536)

Just though we should expand on the point estimates...

With a 99% confidence interval, 42.5 to 49.4% of women prefer doing their own computer trouble-shooting.

Additionally, With a 99% confidence interval, women prefer a new:
plasma TV to a diamond necklace, 74.1 to 79.9%

plasma TV over a weekend vacation in Florida, 52.6 to 59.4%

digital video camera to a pair of designer shoes, 83.6 to 88.4%

This is great! So much better than buying the S.O. a bowling ball for Christmas.

90% of my friends/family just drop me call (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15830116)

>with 46 percent doing their own computer trouble-shooting.

Using my own data :
- 90% of my friends/family just drop me call

The results seem flawed

Technophobia's rampant these parts (1)

dosius (230542) | more than 8 years ago | (#15830118)

The other 20% of women live in my neck of the woods.

-uso.

NICE!! (3, Funny)

brunokummel (664267) | more than 8 years ago | (#15830120)

Does that mean then that I should buy a palmtop instead of a diamond ring to my girlfriend when we decide to get married?
I'm pretty sure that I'll enjoy the present as well! Not to mention that it's way more useful than a ring unless, of course we're talking about this ring [thinkgeek.com]

Re:NICE!! (1)

Pesh Hawksfire (928893) | more than 8 years ago | (#15830396)

Also, with the rate of divorce these days, Planned Obsolescence is dramatically more symbolically correct than Diamonds Are Forever.

Whole Devices (5, Funny)

Redwin (805980) | more than 8 years ago | (#15830121)

"Women were found on average to own 6.6 technology devices while men own 6.9"

The men assured the women that it will be 7 technology devices soon, but they just need to tinker with a couple of parts in the last device and that they are certain they are supposed to come apart its just that the device is being a bit stubborn...

Re:Whole Devices (1)

Mr_Dyqik (156524) | more than 8 years ago | (#15830173)

I'm sure I've had some gadgets that only count as 0.9 of a device, the most recent being a 3g mobile phone. It was a heap of doggy doodoos - crap interface, crap features, half of which didn't work and the rest of which you had to pay to use.

hmm (4, Funny)

Fusione (980444) | more than 8 years ago | (#15830124)

I wonder how many slashdotters are gonna show this to their girlfriends the next time they ask fo- oh wait.. nevermind. I forgot where I was for a moment. :P

Warning, sexism coming your way (4, Funny)

Opportunist (166417) | more than 8 years ago | (#15830131)

Hmm... 6.6 devices on average. In other words: cellphone, cellphone, ladyshaver, vaccuum cleaner, can opener, erhm... personal vibratory relaxation helper and a car that spends 40% of its time in the garage for repairs 'cause she can't figure out how to drive stick without ruining the transmission.

Insightful? (1)

Opportunist (166417) | more than 8 years ago | (#15830548)

I can see the funny. I can even see the troll. But insightful?

But it's nice to see that I'm not the only sexist pig in the IT world. :)

Blame it on Microsoft... (1)

jkrise (535370) | more than 8 years ago | (#15830132)

Women were found on average to own 6.6 technology devices while men own 6.9, and four out of every five women felt comfortable using technology with 46 percent doing their own computer trouble-shooting."

Exactly what does this trouble-shooting mean? Downlaod patch, double-click, install, Say your prayers and Reboot?

Back in the Unix days, it used take Real Men (TM) to troubleshoot a computer!

Troubleshooting? (3, Insightful)

crull (221987) | more than 8 years ago | (#15830136)

What kind of troubleshooting? Troubleshooting can be a pretty much anything from, "I can't seem to find the zoom button" to "Why doesn't this daemon function properly".

Of all the women I know exactly one do their own troubleshooting. And don't say things like, "You're a geek, maybe you know two women, your mom and sister, and the latter does her own troubleshooting".

46% just sounds a lot if it's not very basic troubleshooting. I don't even think 46% of the men is doing his own troubleshooting.

But when will he...? (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15830138)

Okay, so how do I get my boyfriend to buy me that big shiny engagement beowulf cluster I've always dreamed of?

Re:But when will he...? (3, Funny)

CCFreak2K (930973) | more than 8 years ago | (#15830572)

Surely you mean an engagement token ring...

Well, of course (5, Informative)

9x320 (987156) | more than 8 years ago | (#15830139)

If you had watched that special on The History Channel's Modern Marvels about the history of diamond mining, you'd know that diamonds are valuable because of the De Beers mining company obtaining a monopoly on diamond mining by gradually buying out and merging with all the other diamond companies in South Africa, and gradually the world. They then instituted a propaganda campaign in order to get couples to buy the diamonds, while releasing only a set number of diamonds every year, thus keeping demand artificially high.

Their monopoly was threatened by the Soviet Union finding diamonds in modern Russia. After the collapse of the Soviet Union, De Beers bought out nearly all the diamonds that had fallen into the hands of former Soviet countries. In the 21st century they are threatened by a Canadian diamond company founded by a Canadian geologist once thought to be crazy for suspecting the presence of diamonds in Northwest Canada.

They were finally fined $5 million by the Department of Justice with their monopolistic tactics, but obviously that's like the EU fining Microsoft. I think people are finally waking up and smelling the coffee, realizing that these gems are merely worthless shiny rocks, though the advent of artificial diamonds doesn't hurt.

Here, Wikipedia has an entry. [wikipedia.org]

Re:Well, of course (2, Informative)

linvir (970218) | more than 8 years ago | (#15830287)

It seems that De Beers is the most evil bunch on the planet [fguide.org] . Thank you for linking to that information. I plan to take every opportunity to fuck with De Beers from this day forward.

Re:Well, of course (2, Funny)

jordank2001 (544543) | more than 8 years ago | (#15830405)

Or you could give into De Beers and fuck with a girl from this day forward. Although remember go with De Beers the diamond company...if you go with the other kind of De Beer, you may be fucking a girl who isn't so desirable :)

Re:Well, of course (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15830459)

Yeah, and most of the tech stuff that's supposed to replace diamonds as a shiny gift was made by workers on a subsistence wage in totalitarian countries. Not a huge improvement.

The Onion has a nice piece [theonion.com] on it.

I'd take a healthy dash of doubt on those numbers (3, Insightful)

Moridin42 (219670) | more than 8 years ago | (#15830141)

The article also reports:

The study found over the next five years women see themselves increasing their activities in six tech areas: digital cameras, cell phones, e-mail, camera phones, text messaging and instant messaging.


I'll grant you that not everybody is proficient with these devices/apps. But pushing shutter releases and send buttons does not make one tech savvy. Man or woman.

I also wonder where they draw the line for 'technology devices'. Since everything from forks to keys to credit cards to laptops is technology. Just not all of it is recent.

And lastly.. does the thought "well, I rebooted Windows and everything worked fine" count as "computer trouble-shooting" ?

Re:I'd take a healthy dash of doubt on those numbe (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15830284)

So, all those "tech" areas include devices for taking pictures, talking, and combinations thereof. Women sure are expanding their interests these days...

Re:I'd take a healthy dash of doubt on those numbe (1)

umghhh (965931) | more than 8 years ago | (#15830290)

I thing categorizing people into two groups (as Clint Eastwood once did: "there are two types of people: one with the guns and ones that have to dig - you dig") is abit simplistic. Reality is muchmore complex and may for instance be structured like this:
  1. not IT compatible: managers, politicians, mentaly impaired etc i.e people that have others to do their jobs for them.
  2. tech savvy - they know computer when they see one, they know how to start IE, Outlook, MSWord, Excell and possibly even how to install software. Some of them even know some web basics and some of them even work in IT :). This category includes also people driving modern cars which are a wonder of IT these days. Plane pilots too as they have a lots of video gaming to do while flying.
  3. geeks - people that for whatever reason know there are alternatives to predominant office suite/OS, in some rare contexts this may mean that they know how tu install linux etc. They also know that software can be rebooted to make things work better :).
  4. emacs fanatics (coders?) - these are the ones that actually know why things do not work
  5. vi wizards (admins,hackers???) - they know why things do not work and more importantly how to make them work.
In the mind of the common folk two later categories do not really exist as they do not know what emacs/vi are. They call them geeks/hackers depending on weather and if they were mentioned within context of a public prosecution or just general IT. I attached the mentioned categories to certain editors but this is just my view - in reality they are broadly IT: professionals or kids that know things.

BTW: being a hacker or admin or experienced user etc does not qualify you to be in any of above categories. The names chosen are arbitrary and serve only as an anchor for each category.

Re:I'd take a healthy dash of doubt on those numbe (3, Insightful)

Moridin42 (219670) | more than 8 years ago | (#15830466)

It doesn't really matter how you categorize.

My point wasn't to say "ooooh. lookit the women who think they're technophiles but aren't!"
My point was to more say "using the ubiquitous tools of the day isn't particularly noteworthy."

The AC above was pretty close. Young women are pretty well noted (deservedly or not) as talking a lot on the phone. But since now the phone is celluar, there is something new going on? There isn't. Or instead of loading the camera with film, its loaded with a card. Its still a camera, though. Maybe if you could show a shift in who the women were communicating with, it would be notable. Say, they're using IM and email as a primary method of finding new friends. Or if a demographic of women now have friends from demographics they previously didn't, thanks to email, IMs, whatever. If the science changes but the activies are basically the same, its my opinion that this is No Big Deal.

The factoids that might perhaps slightly be called "mildly surprising" would be the ones about preference for gadgets over jewelry, vacations, and shoes. But that depends on how the question was asked.

"Would you rather have a plasma tv or a diamond necklace?" is a very different question from "Would you rather recieve a plasma tv or a diamond necklace as a gift?" Similarly, asking "would you rather buy a digital camera or designer shoes?" is a different question from asking "if you could have a digital camera or designer shoes, which would it be?" One is asking which do you find to be a more valuable purchase on a finite budget, and the other asks, if money weren't a factor, what would you have? Yet either one could be put into a survey and then written about as "technology is what women want!" It wouldn't at all surprise me if women responded in favor of the gadgets to one type of question, as gadgets can be enjoyed frequently. The other type, however, may elicit responses from the same women in a different fashion as they imagine the rarer occassions when they want to really go all out. Times when the plasma tv doesn't go with you and the digital camera may be useful for taking pictures. But if you don't look good for the event, maybe you don't want that particular picture.

Girls prefer tech huh? (4, Funny)

Aphrika (756248) | more than 8 years ago | (#15830146)

'diamonds are no longer a girls best friend', at least according to a recent study commissioned by the Oxygen Network.
I wonder how the results would have panned out if the survey was done by Tiffany and Co. [tiffany.com] ...

Re:Girls prefer tech huh? (1)

aadvancedGIR (959466) | more than 8 years ago | (#15830378)

Or by Tornado, as I bet most homes have a vaccum cleaner.

6.9? (1)

calculadoru (760076) | more than 8 years ago | (#15830149)

there is a joke in there waiting to come out, about men, women and 6.9...
hmmmm.

Re:6.9? (1)

zepher-109 (650844) | more than 8 years ago | (#15830197)

More like geeks, gadgets and 6.9

Square root of 69? (4, Funny)

Stripsurge (162174) | more than 8 years ago | (#15830236)

What's the square root of 69?
8 something

Re:Square root of 69? (3, Funny)

Ohreally_factor (593551) | more than 8 years ago | (#15830433)

Why is 69 better than 61?

You get 8 more

Smells of sampling bias! (1)

KNicolson (147698) | more than 8 years ago | (#15830157)

The respondents seem to be taken from viewers of the show "Girls Gone Wired", which gives you a hint as to what sort of demographics the show has. Perhaps "Girl geeks are just about as geeky as guy geeks" might have been a closer to the truth, but less catchy, headline.

I can't find a more detailed breakdown than the linked article to be sure, but it smells fishy.

I'd also love to know what the "technology devices" they counted were - an iPod, mobile phone, console, digi camera or even laptop are commonplace enough; I'd be impressed by GPSs, PDAs, and Linux boxes instead.

Re:Smells of sampling bias! (1)

Ohreally_factor (593551) | more than 8 years ago | (#15830443)

I can't find a more detailed breakdown than the linked article to be sure, but it smells fishy.

Do girl geeks bathe even less than guy geeks? That might explain it.

Yeah right! (warning...on-topic rant!) (5, Funny)

Lissajous (989738) | more than 8 years ago | (#15830158)

[rant]
They obviously didn't ask *my* SOH. Here I sit in front of 5 TFT monitors, 3 computers, hi-def projector, a plethora of consoles, and is she content with that? No! She still wants the diamonds! I mean - seriously! Where did they get these mythical women from? Shoes?! Don't even get me started on shoes! Have you seen our shoe closet? It's applying for its own post code next month. You can see it from Google Earth. And TFA wants me to believe that women would choose to have tech *instead* of holidays, shoes, gems? I call foul, I tell you - FOUL! They want the lot! Tech and shoes. Shoes and tech. Techy shoes would have my grrl in a shopping frenzy. Ohgodohgodohgodohgod can you imagine? The horror! THE HORROR!!!!! (5 exclamation marks, the sure sign of an insane mind)
*ahem*
[/rant]

Re:Yeah right! (warning...on-topic rant!) (1)

jordank2001 (544543) | more than 8 years ago | (#15830388)

Only on Slashdot would this get modded insightful ;)

Re:Yeah right! (warning...on-topic rant!) (3, Funny)

cruachan (113813) | more than 8 years ago | (#15830426)

Yeah love to know where the shoe thing comes from. Starts young though, when the whole family went on holiday this year - travelling around europe and carrying stuff in backpacks - my 12 year old daughter was told to she could only take two pairs of shoes in addition to the ones she was wearing. Also as the youngest she had a smaller pack and the rest of us would each carry some of her stuff.

It was only after a several days out we figured that she'd managed to pring 9 pairs, having individually talked the me, my wife and my son into carrying her 'extra two pairs'.

Re:Yeah right! (warning...on-topic rant!) (1)

ObsessiveMathsFreak (773371) | more than 8 years ago | (#15830469)

Techy shoes would have my grrl in a shopping frenzy. Ohgodohgodohgodohgod can you imagine? The horror! THE HORROR!!!!!


Too late. [wikipedia.org]

Early Adopters.. (3, Interesting)

tktk (540564) | more than 8 years ago | (#15830161)

In my mind, that .3 difference is probably due to males being early adopters. My 2 sisters and I have basically the same gadgets but they lag behind a bit. We've all gotten iPods, laptops, bluetooth headsets, Tivos, & etc.

I got a Tivo 5 years ago, one sister bought it 2 years ago, and the youngest is probably going to buy one before she heads off to college this fall.

Once in a while, I'll catch my youngest sister talking on her phone to her boyfriend about WOW and be embarrassed for them. A nice change for once.

Come on... (1)

Klaidas (981300) | more than 8 years ago | (#15830179)

Give it a break - just because women are now more into computers and IT stuff, it doesn't mean that a perfect present for my girlfriend's birthday would be a new hard drive.

Re:Come on... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15830380)

I don't know, it might be a nice change from the floppy disk she's probably used to getting.

Re:Come on... (1)

Sgt. CoDFish (943288) | more than 8 years ago | (#15830394)

Ah... when that happens, and women DO want tech stuff for their birthday, I'll finally be able to buy the perfect present, because I'll actually understand what's hot and what's not... no more "Oh yeah, that's... erm... lovely. Thanks." comments about various fashion items meant as presents, but obviously showing my lack of knowledge about anything fashionable.

Just imagine the look on your girlfriend's face when she sees you got her the new *insert trendy and popular tech item here*!

That'll be the day... (well, a guy can dream.)

My Observations (2, Insightful)

miyako (632510) | more than 8 years ago | (#15830194)

I have a few observations on the subject. I think that the first thing that immediately lept to mind has also been the prevailing comment so far, and that is that 46% seems awfully high for men or women for doing troubleshooting, unless you count troubleshooting as saying "hmm, something's wrong.".
That aside, it seems to me that women have a higher average technological competency than men, speaking in general terms, however there also seems to be a smaller standard deviation. Of the men I know, most seem to be either geeks or luddites. Most of the men I know have only very recently started considering using cell phones (many men I know don't own one), and very rarely, if every, use a computer. On the other hand, I know very few female geeks, but I also can't think of any female luddites. Most women I know were early adopters of cell phones, and most women I know use the computer more than men, and for more versatile tasks (e.g. I know a lot of men who literally never use the computer for anything except ebay, most women I know use the computer for the web as well as email, IM, iTunes, photos, etc.).
Of course the survey contradicts my own observations, but I also think terms like "technology gadgets" are extemely vauge. In my experience, women are generally early adopters of technologies that enable creativity and communication (cell phones, IM, scanners, photo editing software, etc.) whereas men tend to be early adopters of technology that is primarily entertainment (dvd players, video games, etc.).

Re:My Observations (1)

alxkit (941262) | more than 8 years ago | (#15830225)

They can make "new car smell", why not "new electronics smell"? I'd buy it. There is such a smell. It is a unique combination of blood, sweat, tears, gear oil, isopropyl alcohol, MEK, flux and some ESD wax. mmmmm mmmmm good.

I think it's safe to say... (1)

nowhere.elysium (924845) | more than 8 years ago | (#15830195)

that this was taken from a technologically-literate sample population. It's equally safe to say that this is not the norm in the real world, so these numbers are going to be vastly biased. If 46% of women (or men)did their own troubleshooting, there'd be far less call for people like us (the IT techs and sysadmins of the world). I don't really care about the gender bias: in my book, users are users, so it's not a thing that I really notice per se. I honestly reckon that when people were interviewed for this, they said 'Oh yes, of course I can sort out my computer', purely because it makes them look better, just as most people fill out personals adverts saying they're slim to average build, when they're actually 240lb lardballs.
People lie to paint themselves in a better light. Nothing to see here.

eh... (2, Insightful)

Rooked_One (591287) | more than 8 years ago | (#15830219)

the age group seems a little biased.... there are just as many (if not more) women that are over the age of 49 than under - probably..... But I bet the curve of this is really scewed to the 15 year old side... My mother falls right in the eldest of the group, and while she is comfortable with computers, she can bearly troubleshoot and would take a diamond ring over a TV anyday - but then again she is a teacher that doesn't watch much TV.

Re:eh... (1)

john83 (923470) | more than 8 years ago | (#15830515)

My mother falls right in the eldest of the group, and while she is comfortable with computers, she can bearly troubleshoot and would take a diamond ring over a TV anyday - but then again she is a teacher that doesn't watch much TV.

Quick word of advice, don't ever let her see the sentence where you used "that" to refer to a person.

The 49% figure sounds like rubbish to me. I'd like to see the survey questions. I don't know too many women whose technical skills extend beyond basic MS Office, web browsing, email and uploading illegally copied music to their ipods. In fairness though, I know plenty of men who are no better.

WTF is a 'technology device'? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15830223)

Is a pencil a technology device? How about a stapler, or a televison or a car? Extreme stupidity rules it seems.

NOOOOOOO!!!! (0, Redundant)

LittleBigScript (618162) | more than 8 years ago | (#15830241)

Never again will I be able to pick up chicks in the computer lab...

Re:NOOOOOOO!!!! (1)

conteXXt (249905) | more than 8 years ago | (#15830311)

"again"?

Ok now I've stopped laughing. Carry on.

Social Commentary (2, Interesting)

Niet3sche (534663) | more than 8 years ago | (#15830260)

I'm curious. I seriously wonder if this, too, will be used as evidence to support that men and women are more different than alike (philosophically speaking, note).

Here's my prediction: The current status quo tends towards women not being adopters, purveyors, or masters of technology. While there are certainly pockets of discourse and space that argue against this, I would suggest this story is more widespread than its alternative (e.g. "women are technologically-savvy"). I have to wonder at what point the evidence for the realization that there is more intra-group variability than extra-group variability between the sexes will become wholly overwhelming and force a change in the commonplace "line" on women in/and technology.

I promised a prediction - here it is.

When the above assertion becomes commonly accepted, so too will the notion that women are fully able and capable of using, enjoying, and mastering technology. However, we will supplant the current story with a new one - "Women are using technology as wholly a surrogate for that which they do best - that 'social stuff'."

I should blog on this, but it's late. Thoughts? Am I way off-topic here?

Re:Social Commentary (1)

john83 (923470) | more than 8 years ago | (#15830531)

No, you're actually very on topic. I don't think your prediction is right though, any more than I think that women will ever make up 50% of CS and engineering courses. Of course, as technology becomes more accepted and easier to use (think what the one button control on the ipod has done for tech adoption), more people (women are people too) will use it (women my age can generally use a VCR - my dad can't), but real competence will remain in the hands of those interested enough to fiddle with the more complicated stuff. Sorry for the horrible formatting on my reply, but I'm too tired to be coherent right now.

SO? Who cares? (1)

PrayingWolf (818869) | more than 8 years ago | (#15830261)

In other news, the food gender gap has virtually closed with the majority of women making their own sandwitches and other types of food and actually eating it! Independent studies show that 10 out of 10 women do eat, meaning that females follow the same patterns of behavious as men.

The ability to use high-tech seems to be considered a measure of your human value - why? We're not supposed to be categorized into the technological aristocracy and the other people. Please, feminists, stop problematizing everything - you are just as valuable human beings even without winning (or entering) the competition for the longest time in fluorescence light or owning a WD Raptor or iPod.

As an afterthought, I fear the "Oxygen Network that is owned and operated by women" might be a bit biased in issues concerning women...

what? (1)

chowdy (992689) | more than 8 years ago | (#15830265)

Troubleshooting? Next you'll tell me they can vote... and are interested in me.

Oh... (3, Funny)

Doc Ruby (173196) | more than 8 years ago | (#15830273)

Ever since mobile phones started to vibrate, the gender gap has been more filled.

Re:Oh... (1)

Ohreally_factor (593551) | more than 8 years ago | (#15830476)

Is "gender gap" the new euphemism for "axe-wound" [rathergood.com] ?

success? (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15830298)

with 46 percent doing their own computer trouble-shooting...

... and failing miserably.

Nothing New To Me (2, Interesting)

baronvonchickenpants (696100) | more than 8 years ago | (#15830357)

My wife is a cellular tech, and she's just as comfotable with technology as I am, if not more so. She uses our iPod more than I do, carries a Motorola SLVR, and can't wait to get a MacBook.

indeed... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15830364)

Does it mean forty six percent of women are ugly? The stats must be wrong.. it must be wrong.. I know many more ugly women than this!

Survey Problems (2, Insightful)

xdxfp (992259) | more than 8 years ago | (#15830368)

I wouldn't despute that women use technology, but don't confuse that with an interest in technology. Most women I know use computers for e-mail, myspace, ordering flowers, etc.

Second, the fine print says women ages 15-49. Why not 15-99? Perhaps they wanted to distort the numbers to make it newsworthy.

Lastly, the study cannot imply anything about whether women actually like technology more than clothes. Perhaps they would prefer a digital camera to a pair of shoes because they have 200 shoes, and only a crappy disposable camera.

I am a woman who loves technology and hates shoes (3, Interesting)

AriaStar (964558) | more than 8 years ago | (#15830427)

What the hell is it with this assumption to all women love shoes? Shoe-shopping gives me hives. I am a 25-year-old analytical engineer specializing in e-mail security, and eyes bug out when that's said. Why? Why assume women are technologically inferior? Why assume that tech is a man's field? Sure, there's this smug sense of doing something that sounds cool that a lot of women aren't doing, but it would sure be nice if it weren't greeted with a sense of disbelief, if more women weren't so intimidated.

This articles makes women out to be a bunch of fashion whores who are shocking people by wanting tech items. A weekend vacation in Florida is over in a weekend. That diamond necklace will only be worn on special occassionas (unless given by someone special, in which case I'd never take it off, as I never take off my pearl necklace except to shower). Why take the designer shoes over a pricey camera when knock-offs of those shoes can be had for $20? That plasma TV would be great for picking up the details in every outfit on Sex and the City. *sense the sarcasm*

Yet a plasma TV hardly counts for tech in my book. Why is an LCD TV not considered tech? Because they are hardly more than appliances. You want to fix a TV, you take it to an appliance repair person. Would this TV be considered a technological item if this study were done with men? Or would it be done with an item that requires more knowledge than how to press some buttons on a remote to change the channel?

Do this study with a MacBook and give women a little more credit than as mindless whores only concerned about where they shoes are Jimmy Choo or whatever. Then maybe more of us wouldn't be afraid of entering the domain of men.

Who am I kidding? I love being a woman in a man's world.

Re:I am a woman who loves technology and hates sho (1)

Savage-Rabbit (308260) | more than 8 years ago | (#15830496)

This articles makes women out to be a bunch of fashion whores who are shocking people by wanting tech items. A weekend vacation in Florida is over in a weekend. That diamond necklace will only be worn on special occassionas (unless given by someone special, in which case I'd never take it off, as I never take off my pearl necklace except to shower). Why take the designer shoes over a pricey camera when knock-offs of those shoes can be had for $20? That plasma TV would be great for picking up the details in every outfit on Sex and the City.
*sense the sarcasm*


Good point, but in future remember that to qualify for sarcasm bonus-points on this forum you have to properly tag your sarcasm like a real nerd/nerdette:

<sarcasm> ... </sarcasm>

Re:I am a woman who loves technology and hates sho (1)

AriaStar (964558) | more than 8 years ago | (#15830553)

You are correct. I just updated my LiveJournal before posting and was still in the mindset of posting in such a way that the normal people on my friends list would understand it. Typically I make up my own tags. 'Tis fun.

You know, if I were to try tagging anything in this reply, I'd come off looking like a loser. You took the fun out of it.

Re:I am a woman who loves technology and hates sho (1)

AriaStar (964558) | more than 8 years ago | (#15830562)

Hey, Slashdot took out my made-up code for a grin and put nothing in its place to indicate it was there! It was not meant to be read and tossed. Damn them. Ruined my night. Grrrrrrrrrr.....
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?