> the first-ever study to measure users’ actual ability to perform daily tasks on a PC<p>Amazing, if true.<p>> age remains the most important factor in how well an individual can use applications.<p>> the most important thing in using a spreadsheet program is practice<p>I have a feeling those older user would do just fine if Windows behaved like Windows 95 to Windows 7 and Office behaved like Office 95 to Office 2003. And I don't really think it's the users' intelligence that is the problem.<p>On Desktop in 2025, Windows usage is >70%, Mac >15% [0]. I think some of us techies have rosy glasses because our occupations let us afford frequent Apple everything, but this is not a financial reality for most.<p>This computer-usage-researcher finds that computer users who are better at using computers are smarter and younger? (And not that the systems themselves are stupider than they should be?) Interesting.<p>There is a digital divide, and TFA does help describe its characteristics. Contributors to the divide are not just economics-driven-availability, but rather, "availability in general" of sane systems, partially informed by who is willing/able to put in the effort to even use a computer effectively.<p>More and more, I don't think it's lack of intelligence leading users to give up--I think it's a *different kind* of intelligence that informs users that it's not "worth it" to suffer. As software producers, we can do better.<p>Even we on HN are on a sliding scale of user-savviness.<p>What happened to "it's never the user's fault"? Is that adage gone?<p>[0] <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Usage_share_of_operating_systems#Desktop_and_laptop_computers" rel="nofollow">https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Usage_share_of_operating_syste...</a>