±«Óãtv

I think that FOLDOC might not do the trick even for experienced users. We needs some kind of a new dictionary, and frankly speaking, I am amazed that no publisher has tackled that issue so far. Luckily, there's good ol' Wiki.

Remember, a pc is a machine and a tool. As with all tools and machines, it is best to READ THE MANUAL before you start. Would you buy a car and give it to a 10 year old? Why buy a pc if you do not know how to use it, that includes the language necessary to understand instructions. A simple 2 to 4 hour course in pc basics will teach the average user how to read the screens and "geek" language basics.

"Blessed are the Geeks, for they shall inherit the Earth...."

"You don't understand ? YOUR problem, not MINE !"

SysAdmins rule OK !

Perhaps the question here is, who is your article intended for, the people who do know what broadband, HDMI and 802.11n are, or those that dont?

You are covering the latest developments in electronics and technology. If a report doesnt present us with something technical or unfamiliar, it hasnt given us anything new.

If you dumb it down too much, it becomes useless to everyone, at which point you might as well refer them to The Gadget Show.

Of course if the term 'geek' wasnt used so much it might help too. Knowing how something works is nothing to be ashamed of, or feared for that matter.

Instead of avoiding all technical reporting, why not provide the detailed coverage and if necessary provide a seperate 'Technology for Beginners' or some other introductory report.

It's "over-easy"!

"As I pushed though the seething masses..."

I'm slightly perplexed by the ±«Óãtv's use of blogs. They seem to be online travellogs, streams of consciousness. Whilst sometimes it's interesting to get a "behind the scene view" the reality is that the big name blogs like TechCrunch get readers because they publish the news first. I'd suggest ±«Óãtv journalists use blogs in this information-driven style for the majority of articles. Publish fresh news and use it as a testbed for material (and sometimes styles) for the main site. Not to tell us what you ate for breakfast or using the over lenghthy "clever" prose of a Sunday newspaper comment column.

All the geeks that understand the language took the time and effort to learn the language and terms.

If you don't know anything about how cricket is played, don't go to a match and expect them to slow down after each play and explain it to you.

If you don't make the effort to learn, stand aside.

The ±«Óãtv could post a link in tech stories to a geek glossary or such for the impaired. Don't hold back on the content.

Capeche??

Different groups and cultures use different language. You couldn't expect physicists to talk about 'those small things' and 'those other even smaller things' when they want to say atoms and electrons, and the same principle applies.

If you go to a tech conference, you will have to speak their language to some extent. That, to be honest, is why you are there. You go to the conference, talk to them in their language, and come back and tell the broader audience what you found, without the geek speak. In essence you are in a foreign land, and you are trying to tell us what the news is there.

Geeks have technical terms for things because they generally need them to be sufficiently precise. If I'm talking to you about your articles and I tell you that 'you don't use enough describing words, and you spend too much time asking those questions that don't need an answer, but I like your usage of those phrases where you say one thing means another', then I would be probably quite annoying. To say, however, that you 'need more adjectives, fewer rhetorical questions, but keep up the metaphors', you immediately understand.

So, technical terms are necessary (as long as people aren't just trying to sound clever), but dependent on your audience. At a tech show, the audience is tech people, so banning jargon would be counter-productive and pointless. When you broadcast to the British public you will have to translate.

It's all geek to me...

@Mark, msg 4

"Of course if the term 'geek' wasn't used so much it might help too. Knowing how something works is nothing to be ashamed of, or feared for that matter."

I like the term geek, and proudly label myself one (my other tab's running slashdot ;) ). However I agree with the rest of your post; a technical report\article is better than an overly dumbed down one, as the latter is not of any use to anyone, whereas the former is of great interest to people like us, and will stimulate the general public, who may even go and find out what you're on about, maybe you should even direct them to sources of information.

In short, educating the public is better than presenting a feature with no real merit just so they can understand it. Going back to the Reithian values of the ±«Óãtv: "to inform, educate and entertain", I don't believe that you can do the last without properly doing the first two.

For all of those people that didn't learn geek-speak, use urban dictionary, it has a very good list if user generated terms and definitions for just about anything, from '1337 speak' to H.264/AVC Video codecs.

Like any other specialized field, technology has its own language. There is simply too much complexity to be able to discuss specifics meaningfully in layman's vocabulary. Would you trust a doctor who told you "Oh - I see the problem now! You have a boo-boo on your little tummy?" I didn't think so.

In this world, consumers have two basic options:

1) They can "learn the lingo" so that they can understand the technical details when people are "speaking geek." The obvious difficulty here is that the landscape is changing so rapidly that this is an uphill climb.

2) They can remain ignorant of the technology and its unique dialect and instead rely on a professional to help them decide what they want and need. The obvious problem here - as you no doubt saw at CES - is that those people often have a significant stake in pushing their own agenda. Have you ever noticed that the helpful people at the electronics store always seem to believe that the value to you in any given device is proportional to the commission that they're receive if you buy it? Funny that...

As "±«Óãtv News' Technology Correspondent" I'm sure that you must be aware of this simple truth. Hopefully you're also aware of the fact that you're in a unique position to help move people from one group into the other. If you (and people like you) can start explaining these complex technologies and the often subtle differences between them in terms that "the masses" can understand, you're arming them to face the brave new world ahead. So please don't just tell us that these things are complex and scary. Put them in terms that everyone can understand, so that no one need be afraid again.

Re. SysAdmins "YOUR problem, not MINE": Our money, not yours!

RTFM! OK! BBFN

RTFM.

Trust me.

It will save you an awful lot of pain later.

I liked the piece - we are hedged round with technospeak and mumbo-jumbo, not just in pc and computerland either.

Can I ask, however, how many ±«Óãtv Newses there are?

Rory Cellan-Jones is not ±«Óãtv News' Technology Correspondent. He is ±«Óãtv News's Technology Correspondent, or, if you can't bear using the possessive apostrophe correctly, he is the Technology Correspondent of (or for) ±«Óãtv News.

An annoying point, I know, but relevant in the context of the article I hope>

Best wishes for 2007.

802.11a, b, g, g+, i, n. What next?

As a geek, can any salesman (or woman) tell me what the 802.11 stands for and how it got its name?

If not, I shall be happy to provide the answer to the 'uninitiated' masses.

On the other hand, when I watch "Top Gear", I don't expect them to explain things like "fuel injection" and "dual wishbone transmissions"...

I disagree with Chuck about the read the manual stuff. The key to a well made product is how user friendly and intuitive it is. I read an article about someone in Delhi who stuck a pc with an internet connection outside his house. With a few days the local street kids had become completely pc capable.

You can read it here:

You learn as you go. The real onus is not on the man in the street, or the kid in the street, but on the makers and the high priests, if you like of this technology. They need to work at making it less and less arcane, and more simple. You don't exactly need a user manual for a car or tv, why should any of this technology be any different?

I hate using some programs precisely for the reason they are so counter-intuitive. Photoshop is a great example. There are so many more simple ways you could get done what photoshop does, but instead you have to be a complete techhead to use that software. That is the fault of the makers not the users.

Again for more user friendly sophisticated interfaces for photoshop type apps, see here:

I am a half breed of between a business person and a techie, probably amongst the earliest ones in my country who host a server in my home when www came about in its early days. I must say that I felt challenged with the new geek terms all the time. I just have to find out about it if it is important enough for me.

Let's accept it. There are tons of new geek terms coming and will always come. Why feel any obligation to learn any of it, unless you desire to upgrade your electronic lifestyle with a new HDTV? Still can't get geeked? Use the advise of someone you trust. Don't have anyone you trust? May God be with you!

When I read your article, I felt a little strange. Did ±«Óãtv send the wrong journalist to the right event? Or was it the right journalist to the wrong event?

I was pleased to read that others find the constant use of Acronyms annoying, but it is interesting to find that in order to comment on the use of 'Geek' language in the 'Post a comment' section it is assumed that I know what is meant by URL and HTML.
In fairness, it is not only the electroncs world which tries to impress by using a 'secret' code language. Look at education: PTR,IQ, CTBS, the list goes on and on. Aren't I smart ... I know what they mean.
ej adams

I think that a short dictionary will do enormious good. Geek language is very irritating to non-geeks. Every time I am trying to enthuse about some "old news" like rss feeds or podcasts, some of my friends assume this peculiar "why-should-I-be-a-subject-of-all-this-geek-talk" air, so that I have to change the subject. Probably, if to focus more on benefits of technology rather than geek-manner rants it'll help.

As someone who works in the tech industry I understood all the terminology above but I'm firmly of the opinion that reports can be done without containing much jargon.

What bothers me most is that there is a disproportionate amount of time spent discussing how complex this all is, how consumers don't understand when the time would be much better spent finding good ways of educating the public.

The companies are always going to speak in technical ways and we need you to listen to it and do the hard bit: turning jargon and press releases into real news which is understandable.

One of the big differences between geeks and non-geeks is that generally in a techie conversation a geek will stop and ask what a technical term they are not familiar with means. By contrast non-geeks are usually so concerned with social positioning that they'll try and bluff their way by. The moral is if you do not understand a terms is to ask - most geeks are more than happy to explain if you show an interest in tech and indeed will think more of you for asking.

Of course tech sales people muddy the waters being like sales people everywhere, but they usually only talk between themselves anyway :-)

No dictionary is required. When you come across an acronym you don't understand in conversation ask the speaker to explain (geeks rarely object to technical questions, and if a new word is found in print look it up that's what the internets for.

Often with compicated software, I know exactly what I want to do but don't have the words to describe it sufficiently to find the entry in Help or the manual. Thus I find indexes with every conceivable cross-reference like in the Apple Final Cut Pro manual very helpful.

Mr. Cellan-Jones - would you attend a medical convention and lambaste the doctors for speaking in medical jargon?

You learn what the words 'adjective' and 'metaphor' mean in grade school. Same with 'atom' and 'electron'. That makes those words fair game.

But even if it could keep up with the speed at which new tech words are created, it seems like the public school system isn't even trying to tackle technology yet.

You might know what an atom is, but if you asked your doctor what effect a medicine would have, you're not expecting the response to be in full chemcial detail. You'd be completely lost if it was. Even reporting that focuses only on health and medicine still does a fair amount of translation and simplification. Same with reporting on science, engineering, even automobiles. You might not give a car to a 10 year old, but you also won't be surprised if a 20 year old is ok driving it without knowing what a dynamometer is or how a transmission works.

Technical terminology is being created quickly, and a lot of it is only intuitive if you know the older terminology. Starting from scratch is very difficult. There isn't just a 4 hr course to take or a manual to read... and what makes it worse is the 'if you don't already know it, you don't belong here' attitude.

Computer geeks, stop being so defensive! It won't ruin your lives to see a little explanation. Us math and science geeks *always* see reporting in our fields simplified and translated. Your turn!

Essentially, what you're saying is that you're upset with technology vendors because they are making your job hard. Really, I think that's a cop-out on your part.

Technology is a complex subject: This is a fact that is not going to change.

You are a technology commentator. Your job is to take a "geeky" subject matter and translate it conceptually in a way that "non-geeks" can understand. If you don't know how to do this, well...you should really figure out how to or switch jobs.

But don't arrogantly proclaim that tech vendors should dumb down their content or else face your journalistic blacklisting.

Most industries have their own jargon that can seem arcane to the non-professional. Tech is no exception.

New technologies are being adopted by more and more people and the parlance surrounding those technologies is becoming more mainstream. Give people some credit for having the capacity to figure it out. And honestly, most consumer technologies like broadband internet, plug and play devices, wireless, and hi-definition TV aren't really all that obscure or difficult for most "non-geeks" to understand...if the concepts are explained well.

If the journalist wishes, he could ask the audience to contribute short explanatory notes in simple language to help those who don't speak fluent geek. In addition to being helpful, it will also demonstrate which geeks don't speak fluent English - which means they are monolingual in geek-speak.

@Andy, number 6: ±«Óãtv blogs are not for news, that is what ±«Óãtv news is for!

TechCrunch is a news site for the express purpose of breaking tech news (some will say sometimes breaking news too early in an emergent company's life).

I agree that technical subjects need technical language. However it is also important that the speaker also understands any abrieviations and acronyms they use. Next time you are faced with a deluge of TLAs, stop the speaker and ask them what they stand for. If they know, they will usually be only too pleased to explain, if they don't... maybe you need to doubt their own understanding!

When writing technical documents, it is just good manners to provide the full name followed by the acronym or abrieviation in brackets. Subsequent use of the term just then needs the acronym without further explaination.

So don't discourage technospeak, just ensure that both parties understand what is being said.

Clearly most of the people reading these comments haven't a clue what the first four letters of comment 14 mean, however true and hallowed words they may be to us geeks, otherwise the comment would not be there.

It does annoy me when you go into the high street or well known computer stores and listen to the employees trying to sound knowledgable by using all the latest lingo. Take it from someone who knows (without trying to be pompous) it is very easy to confuse the poor blighters when you ask them to explain what they mean. It's no sport really :(

The thing that really annoys me about technology is how plenty of people, when speaking to a non-geek audience just make things sound confusing and switch people off. Most technology concepts can easily be explained without resorting to crazy words.

That said I am hedging my bets, I think I have managed to get my two year old daughter to recognise a USB cable when she sees one. Now for HDMI!

The problem is MUCH larger than most of us realize. The different technical languages are EXACTLY that- different languages. In the full sense of the word.

Their internal meanings, references, and worst; unstated assumptions - are not the same. Any technical jargon is NOT ENGLISH.

Increasingly- we speak to each other; but do NOT understand what someone from another area is actually saying. I work across disciplines, and have been forced to deal with this continually.

We need to recognize this; and have translators handy. "Science writers" in general are still not doing this adequately.

You should be no more surprised you do not understand what they're saying at a technical meeting than that you don't understand what they're saying when you visit Uzbekistan.

Unfortunately, this article will satisfy even justify those who do not feel it necessary to do a little research before they buy. There are any number of magazines that will do this for you in plain English terms.

People want expert equipment at their disposal as if by magic without having any idea of at all of how it works. Instead of asking salespeople for these products to dumb down I would suggest that people might feel more confident (and happy with themselves) if they do a minimum of reading before they hop out to buy). A good salesperson will automatically adjust his vocabulary to fit yours better (after all he or she is trying to sell) but don't expect miracles. you have to meet them halfway. And this will also give you a better understanding of the equipment once it has been purchased and set up.
In short, I find this article more harful than beneficial.

The thing that some seem to be missing is that the ±«Óãtv needs to communicate with a mass audience, and the article is not a condemnation of "geek" terms or geek lifestyle, it is pointing out the difficulties in discussing any specialized field.

As to the person who said that a doctor would not say you had a boo-boo, while this is true the doctor would state what you had, and then explain it in lay terms. As a medical worker, I've stopped doctors from explaining things to me in lay terms because I understood what they said when they said it in medical terms.

When I go to the tech shop, I generally ask what I need to know, and if someone starts in with overly techie terms, I redirect the question and ask them to frame it not in tech terms, but in lay terms, will this give me a better picture? Will this allow me to play the latest games? What is the trade offs in sound value vs price, etc.

There are some people who don't need to know the tech terms, only what the tech can do for them.

The journalist is asking not the geek community, but the business community, to learn that they need to explain themselves properly so that lay persons can understand them, in the same way a doctor must know how to describe an illness in lay terms to a non-medical person.

If businesses want to sell products to the mass audience, they need to know how to communicate with that audience.

The problem you have is that most modern industries have their technical language a.k.a. geek speak. For me, taking a walk around an oil explorationists office is a minefield of acronyms.

It just so happens you can use a car, a kettle, a hairdryer, your atm machine and buy petrol without encountering that technical language. Hi-tech consumer items differentiate themselves based on featuers and functionality that can only be communicated effectively by using technical language.

Hi-tech is no different to any other industry, it just so happens that the products of hi-tech industries are mass-marketed and differentiated in a way that other products aren’t.

It is also worth noting that you were attending a show that's not primarily aimed at consumers, it's more aimed at people who are going to try and sell consumer electronics to make a dollar or two and want to be at the cutting edge of innovation.

In that context I'd say the emphasis is on you to learn the technical language of the industry if you want to report on it effectively. This then bumps up against the problem I often find with ±«Óãtv articles - non technical people reporting on specialist technical items and making some awful gaffs....really, it worries me when I see gaping holes in articles on which I would consider myself a domain expert. It gives me less confidence in reading those articles where I am lacking in domain expertise.

The ±«Óãtv is as guilty as any institution or corporation of using "geek" when it suits. If I had a penny for every time I've been asked, "what's a podcast? I heard about them on the ±«Óãtv..." I'd be able to afford players for both the Blu-ray and HD-DVD formats...

"But when the talk turned to "simultaneous Gigabit ethernet and IEEE 1394 connections over Coax", I turned pale, made my excuses and moved on."

So you mean you can't do your job? Why are you there if you can't understand this method of networking? I haven't heard of this, yet it gets me interested; a cheap way of getting both fast ethernet and firewire over one cable? What better way to network a home, and allow devices to communicate, than over a cheap and easily available coaxial cable that is already used for satellite and DAB devices?

Greetings,

Your point is well taken!
Many, if not most, of the "Marketing" Geek speakers only have a vague idea of the real meaning of the jorgon they babel.

I started in computers in 1956, just after graduating college with a Bachelor of Electrical Engineering (Communications Option).

I am now a retired digital signal processing reseach engineer, and a Senior Member of the IEEE.

The is so much new "stuff" and jargon emerging daily, I have problems keeping up with " Geek babel.

Even my "kid" brother, also now retired, and I often have to resort to plain English to understand each other. He has an engineering degree from MIT.

Thank you for helping clear the fog. We appreciate it.

Respectfully,
Carl M Bennett, BEE: MS
Senior Member IEEE

"i geek therefore i spam"... and if anyone asks - tell 'em "i'm geek orthodox"...

The time had come to estabkish a vearbiage site with several sections: for Geeks, for Politicians, for general sales, for car salellers specifically and for used car sellers part particularly, for Laywers (almost forgot!), and ...

Proflingo is widely used, and often abused. I am an engineer capable, among other things, of calculating heat related problems, however, I cannot understand the factory salsmen's the R-value for the thermal insulation and why the heat capacity of a furnace or an air conditioner is in tons (tons of what? Do I need a crane to install those tons?). Is there the normal lingo? Yes, it is. There is a heat transfer coefficient in Kcal/m2/cm/hr and furnace capacity in kWt, Kcal, or BTU's.

If we do not understand, the salesman can sell more!

This has always been the case not just in technology, with it's relatively simple terms, but with science. The ±«Óãtv's reporting of science also appeals to a mass audience, and leaves anyone with a science degree cringing with the embarrassing simplicity of it all, often so simplistically put that it actually can change, or not emphasise, the actual scientific point behind the whole story.

The way to overcome this is not to try and "educate the population" to the ways of science or technology. Most of the population will never want to understand the difference between inquilines and parasites in much the same way they will never want to understand the terms 'simultaneous Gigabit ethernet and IEEE 1394 connections over Coax'. The solution is to do as science has done over the last hundred or so years - to have scientific journals, and technology journals.

We must come to terms with the fact that complex specialist ideas must be simplified to the Nth degree for a mass audience, and accept that specialist ideas must be the reserve of specialist audiences.

When I worked in the games industry (the geekiest wing of the geekiest profession) one favorite. If someone asked a question that they could have found in a book/internet or whatever. They were sent a 4 letter word from everyone else. RTFM.

It might help if the ±«Óãtv made it's own materials a bit easier to find.

For example, look for Technology on the ±«Óãtv homepage - there is no entry. Try the AZ index and there are only links to News or guidance for under 16s. Search from the ±«Óãtv homepage and the same resources are found.

But search for "firewall", pick the 6th ranked result and there you find a whole section "Webwise" on internet related items (not just limited to the Web).

I just wonder how many people would give up before finding this stuff?

There used to be - and for I know still is - a rule in "professional" scientific publications: the first time you use a term you spell it out with the acronym (or whatever) in brackets immediately afterwards. After which you are free to use the technical abbreviation.
Within obvious reason - if you cannot understand "atom" or "NaCl" you should not be reading the journal.

And yes - I do want a car that can be driven by a 10-year old - so I can pay attention to the object of driving (getting there safely). If I want to work out how to run the car-audio system I use the handbook (if the car springs are up to carrying it around).

C'mon, gang, get with it!

This isn't a 'language', just a bunch of acronyms. (Remember 'NASA', or 'WYSIWYG'?)

They're all explained on Google, by the way...

So-called "secret societies" wanting to puff themselves up have always used gobbledygook to confuse the un-initiated, from time immemorial.

Relax: drop the egos, and it's easy....!

(By the way, I'm 65 years old! :-) )

Jacob Bronowski pointed out years ago in his excellent Ascent of Man series that society must not grow apart from technology and science. This has clear communication as a prerequisite. There is no excuse for not translating specialist terms into understandable language - and those who are not computer-savvy need to do a little work too. The technology is too complex and too important to just ignore! More education is desperately needed on both sides: John Q. Public must do some homework, and John Q. Geek needs to learn English.

That's true geek speak, by the way ;)

One of the first resondants shouted,
"READ THE MANUAL." Well, that's part of the problem: the manuals are written by the same geeks who produced the system, not the people who for whom they are intended.

I suspect that the most interactive electronic piece of equipment is the tv, and the manual for that is probably no longer than 10-15 pages.
However, the manual for the latest edition of MS Word is several hundred pages long, and includes the old "dazzle" feature. I know how to use the "dazzle" feature, but why would I want one on a word processing system?

"Geek speak" comes with every new technology. It's meant to impress other geeks, not the final customers. Remember digital watches? The "old-fashioned" watch face is referred to as "analog." Analogous to what? Remember "rotary" phones? They only became "rotary" with the invention of push-button phones.

So let the geeks speak as they will, as civil servants will, as military persons will, but don't think we are stupid because we, the great unwashed, don't understand what they say, or what they have written.

You'd last all of 1 sec in the modern multi-disiplinary industrial environment.

Just as well you are a journo....wait...you're technology reporter...how many disciplines must you cross within the field of "technology" to report effectively?

I think you're in the wrong job my friend.

Blu-ray? don't they speak that on the planet Betamax

I have complete sympathy with Rory and it's quite funny to see other posts saying things such as 'if you don't present us with something technical or unfamiliar then it is nothing new...' What an elitist and pig-headed view. There plenty of tech-friendly news sources out there on the Internet - this is the ±«Óãtv. As Rory noted, he has to try appealing to the man on the street and through his own tests on Oxford Street, the general knowledge of technical terms is very poor. There is a sociological question to ask about why people 'reject' technical knowledge of consumer products, but on the opposite side of the coin ask why most consumer products have become easier to use over the years and yet the PC remains far from plug n' play.

I'm a geek,
You're a geek,
We're all geeks together!!!

Should you, as a Technology Correspondent, not know these terms? Surely it's a part of the job? Being able to "translate' tech jargon into laymons terms would strike me as being a key part of the job of someone who, as you say, bradcasts to the masses about the latest technology.
And if not, you can always google it, ;)

My favourite is TWAIN ("Technology Without An Interesting Name")

Wikipedia explains its origins in details if your geeky enough to want to know more!

Jargon has a place in any walk of life. It is a form of shorthand that can be both a time saver and a means of clarification. It is the inappropriate use of jargon that is a problem.
As a builder I expect to talk to my bricklayer about 'frogs', 'pigs' and 'smiles' when asking him to build a half brick wall and have him understand me. If my customer has no knowledge of construction then I do not expect to use the same expressions. I certainly do not expect my customer to meet me halfway and swot up on my field of expertise, though I have no objection if he/she chooses to do so. I am happy to explain any and all aspects of my work.
Any communication must be based on understanding and it is down to the person imparting the information to make it as comprehensible as possible to the recipient. It should not be beyond the ability of a competent salesman to describe clearly the features and benefits of any product. Far too often 'trade speak' is used to boost a salesmans ego or to batter the customer into meekly accepting the wrong product or a shoddy job.

Some people would rather spend energy complaining about the complexity of modern appliances/PCs/gadgets than investing a couple of hours reading the friendly manual.

What a lot of the "boo hoo, the mean geeks talk jargon" commenters above seem to be missing is that the original complaint arose from a visit to A TRADE SHOW. That's generally a gathering when you'll expect to find people who work in similiar professions, so it's totally and completely reasonable for them to discuss IEEE1394 and 802.11g and so on.

It's a fairly tragic indictment of the ±«Óãtv's already appalling (compared to 20 years ago) coverage of science and technology that not only do they send someone who doesn't understand technology adequately to cover a technology trade show, but they then consider it acceptable to complain about the language used in public rather than instead seeing that as an embarrassing gap in the knowledge required to do the job of reporting on technology.

Bad science, or plain misinformation about science, appears on the news all the time. Just wait until the Today Programme next goes off on a bender about GM crops or homeopathy for an example - or read the next few science or technology-related stories that appear on news.bbc.

Rory, none of the terms you used in your blog post were particularly outlandish or obscure. If you want to be able to comment on and interpret what was after all an industry event for the general public, it's *your* job to make sure you have the knowledge to do that. How *are* people supposed to talk about IEEE1394 (aka Firewire, more or less) if they aren't allowed to use its name? Yes, you could just say "high-speed data transfer", but the next question would invariably be "Oh, is that over gig ethernet, or 1394, or USB, or...?". "Coax" makes it clear that coaxial cable is used as the medium, not optical fibre or anything else, and this is important because more homes have coax running round their walls then fibre or twisted pair or anything else. All these terms are necessary to avoid ambiguity. Techies hate ambiguity.

Frankly, this was a lazy piece of writing. If you want to be a technology correspondent, you'd probably be best to start doing your homework on technology.

There's an important difference between a necessary technical term and unnecessary jargon. For example, 'atom' is necessary because 'small thing' is not precise enough for a technical conversation. However 'IEEE 1394' is no more precise than 'firewire', so they can be used interchangeably. Unless your are a computer scientist, the origin of 'IEEE 1394' is not important. There is no reason to use a confusing string of letters and numbers when there is a more familiar term with exactly the same meaning. Even uber-geeks need some level of familiar terminology apart from the completely abstract language that computers understand, otherwise they would program directly in binary.

I've just retired from the IT industry after 32 years and I completely agree that 'geek' must go. Part of the problem is that PCs and technology can be so difficult for the ordinary person to use? I have to ask why should it? If similar effort to designing the functionality of a product had gone in to designing its 'usability' then life would be so much better for all (the iPod is a good example and why its sold so well)). Why should I need to know what a 'file' is or 'enter' or login' - these are just terms we used in computing decades ago but they've been allowed to persist by lazy technologists rather than come up with terms we can all understand. I believe fluency in 'geek' just shows you're a technology snob trying to show you know more than the next guy.

It seems to me that, in general, if geek speak is being used in an article it is either because the writer lacks the skills to be able to provide a satisfactory explanation in english (non-geek), or there is no alternative that will carry the required meaning to the reader. For example, if discussing a new consumer device that uses wireless communication as part of its functionality, it may be quite ok to simply explain that the device performs a particular function without the need for wires (i.e. the reader only needs to know that wires will not be needed) and this 'english' explanation conveys the neccessary information, or it may be essential to explain that the device communicates using a particular wireless protocol (e.g. 802.1x, or whatever) and the use of geek is needed to inform the reader that the device requires other devices to use the same protocol to work with this new device. In the first case, it is simply a matter of the writer spending the time and effort to write in non-geek, in the second case there is no avoiding geekery to put across the required information. That said, surely (as has been pointed out) a geek is simply someone who has taken the time and trouble to learn what they need to know. Therefore, I would think that the best way forward is to make use of the features that the web provides us with to make it easier to learn geek, e.g. hypertext, and especially in the case of something like the ±«Óãtv web site, to build a reference source that can be easily linked to from any articles containing geek.
I realise that the whole world wide web is out there to search and retrieve all this wonderful information, but in many cases a certain threshold of knowledge is needed to be able to easily and quickly make use of this resource, and one of the reasons there are so many non-geeks is that many people find it too intimidating, or time consuming, to even get started. A really well written and consistant resource of geek definitions could go a long way towards bridging the gap between geeks and non-geeks, but I sometimes wonder whether some geeks revel in the fact that they know something that many (most?) others don't, especially when it wasn't really too hard to learn, just requiring some time and persistance - lets face it, a lot of geek stuff isn't *that* hard to learn if clearly explained.

Nobody ever reads the manual, unless they're forced to, or have nothing else to do while waiting for something.

As a younger man, I used to take pride in being the "boffin in the white coat" sort, and I'm still proud to call myself a geek. That said though, I think that if the tech companies want to sell equipment & services to the average man on the street, they need to make themselves better understood.

Sadly, when all you have are PC World and Curry's to fall back on, I fear it will simply be more of the same. I've gone into high street & retail park stores over the years, and the ignorance and misinformation on display is enough to drive you mad. I usually give up talking to the staff and end up asking to look at the manual. As for choice? "Only what you can see grandad."

HDMI should be something that anyone selling HDTV understands and can readily explain, but to most it is still "geek speak"

YMMV

If you go over to the ±«Óãtv's gardening pages they talk in gardening jargon about rotation, soil analysis, second earlies, chitting etc. And there are even more pages explaining these terms. So why does the ±«Óãtv believe it has no mission to explain science and technology in a similar way? Perhaps now is a good time to correct this!

I'm in the middle ground on this one. On the one hand, basic tech terms (e.g. Wi-Fi, broadband, UPnP) need greater acceptance so that people know roughly what we're all talking about.

But there's no need to bandy about really tech stuff and standards numbers and acronyms that the man in the street really shouldn't have to worry about. The current generation should be growing up in a world that 'just works'. They know the tech basics and use the technology as a tool without having to know exactly how it works and which bit of kit is supposed to be compatible with which other bit. The tech should just sort this stuff out on its own.

So HDTV or Blu-ray are fine and useful, but tech-specific terms like 1080i and 1080p and 802.11g should be banished to educational establishments where the techies of the future *want* to learn about the innards.

This blog is titled Tomorrow's World, and I think the ±«Óãtv would be wise to bring the Tomorrow's World series back to our screens. It would go a long way in educating the public about technology.

Having worked in the IT industry for 20 years I find it amazing that this discussion is still going on. There a various reasons for for the use of abbreviations.

1. Marketing. Give it a code, code name or abbreviation and it sounds more advanced. I am frequently amazed at how existing ideas are renamed and marketed by companies.

2. Business & Legalities. Why do people know about VHS and Betamax? Because the producers had a battle over which company would be able to license their technology to the most companies. Nothing to do with "geeks". Similarly Blu-ray and HD-DVD.

3. Technical language is used because it is a technical subject. Try to differentiate an Apple IPod and the Microsoft Zune without using technical language and see how far you get. Or, "can I transfer my music from my old IPod to a Zune (legally)?" (I don't know the answer to that one and I'm a techie).

4. Is "mouse" a technical term? How about "website". or are these just new words? At what point did "clutch" and "accelerator" stop being a technical terms and just became part of the language.

I think I have to agree with the poster who said you have to decide who you are writing for. Writing for "millions of people who do not have broadband" is a different audience from the first adopters who will be interested in what is going on at CES.

As one of the millions who don't speak geek, can I just say that you CAN give a 10 year old a car, and teach them how to drive it. That's the point. You don't have to know how an internal combustion engine or anti-lock brakes or whatever works, you know you can turn the key, step on the gas, and steer.

Refusal to explain what you're doing in layman's terms just means you CAN'T explain what you're doing.

I think it's an issue that needs addressing in many areas. I myself am studying towards a Business Information Systems Degree in order to bridge that gap between 'techies' who speak their own language and big businesses that have their own set of linguistic powers.

It would be great if everyone wanted to learn a little from every pot, but alas the blinkers tend to go up and it all gets very confusing.

To Fred: 802.11 is the IEEE (Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers) standard number for WIFI

802 numbers concern networking and LAN's

More examples

802.3 - Ethernet
802.15.1 — Bluetooth
802.15.4 — Wireless Sensor/Control Networks
802.16 — Wireless Networking – "WiMax"

But you know this already right?

Patience my dears. Sys Admins are the shakespeare's of our time. Tomorrow everyone'll understand once the school teachers and the theatre plays kick into place :P

Excuse me? We of The Geek speak that way to ensure that you of the [nongeek] remain cowed. Sorry, its a shaman thing. :)

I really liked Phil Howard's letter re geekspeak. I think he was right on the button re jargon and the use of.

Good job explaining things, except you got one important thing wrong: a geek would probably only have a better than average comprehension of "geek speak". Rightly, it should be called "nerd speak". I don't know how things are in the UK, but in the US the social outcast ecology is thus:
- Nerds are fetishists - more often than not for technology - who are highly intelligent, skilled, and usually employed in some technical capacity.
- Geeks are fetishists - often for technology too - who are generally average in intelligence, not skilled, and if employed work in some nondescript and low-paying capacity.
- Dorks are those who are socially awkward. One can be both a nerd and a dork, or a geek and a dork. But one cannot be both a nerd and a geek.

As with anything, experienced users are unforgiving of newbies. But surely an industry of such stature must be able to cater for both geeks and newbies, and the ±«Óãtv is right to cover both angles, after all this blog is aimed at those who do not trouble themselves to become geeks, their are plenty of other blogs for the geeks.

Get over it and go back to your own blog standard if you don't like this article. Personally all looks a bit Daily Mail but then the Daily Mail is not short of readers, is it.

ok. Having read through everyone's comments, I think i have an idea of a good way to resolve the issue.

I work in a call centre in scotland, and am a complete tech-head. Everything gadget-orientated, all the bells and whistles, and everything that bleeps or hums away cheerfully to itself, i love.

I build computers for pleasure, and recently had the challenge of building a computer for my friend's mother. She is not technically minded, and when she was presented with this computer, she was delighted, but at the same time visibly concerned.

No knowledge of tech-terms, no undertanding of LAN, WAN, SAN or UPnP. Yet she wanted to know what it did.

This was resolved by using a sales technique - using features and benefits! Simply put, this is using 3 simple words; 'which means that'.

This can easily be applied to tech things, for example:

250Gb hard drive - which means that - you can store all of your movies and music on one place

Intel pentium 4 processor with HT technology - which means that - you can listen to music whilst writing an email and putting your favourite movie onto a dvd.

"...Having negotiated that linguistic hurdle I moved on to a stand displaying a system to distribute one HDTV signal around a home - quite a big theme here. But when the talk turned to "simultaneous Gigabit ethernet and IEEE 1394 connections over Coax", I turned pale, made my excuses and moved on..."

This could have been explained more effectively by saying 'using an industry standard TV cable, you can share internet and files within your home or business', or words to that effect.

Simplifying need not be patronising, but it gives an immediate mental benchmark - Gigabytes can translate to movies and songs, internet speed can translate into how many songs you can download in a certain amount of time. Very easily quantifiable, with enough space to relate the techy info with tangible 'proper' information aswell.

Bear in mind, it is also an effective sales technique to use far too much lingo - in all sales! Confuse the customer and they will be too embarassed to say anything.

Tech can be useful, Lingo can be confusing!

SM

The general news on television (±«Óãtv and other providers) is dumbed down - to the point at which I don't bother watching it. Instead I get my news from websites, via RSS.

The ±«Óãtv news on TV is intended for as wide an audience as possible. That would ideally mean at adults with a good level of education, but unfortunately it is intemtionally 'dumbed down' to that of a (for want of a better word) 'simplton'.

Plus the news on television is often incorrect, biased and repeated so many times! Get your news from specialist websites - they are more focused, get instant user comments and are generally not dumbed down.

This blog was written about the Consumer Electronics Show (CES) and of course consumer electronics are by definition made for the masses, as you know each time you (used to?) buy a new TV. Consumer electronics are becoming more complicated to operate and install on the whole and for me this is what the blog is about. Almost a stand against the tide turning in favour of 'geek'.

Ned Ludd would be proud, but look where it got him!

No thanks! I speak real languages--four of them, in fact.

huu