We have been trained to understand a certain concept of "progress." We reject concepts that do not match that training. However, the concept that we learned does not necessarily match reality.

Companies hire public-relations personnel in order to convince us that the new products that they provide are better than those that are already on the market. They may initiate an effective advertising and public relations campaign that can convince us to believe what they tell us. As a result, we are likely to buy their new products, because of two important elements:

• We don't think much about the issues
• We only see the positive elements that are presented in the new item
• Most of us do not argue the premises that are presented
• The company publicizes their products to a large audience, but refutes its deficiencies to a small and limited group

The products are not always better than those that already exist. However, we are influenced by the publicity. As a result, we blame ourselves and our own limitations for any problem with the product – and we rarely look back. Once we begin to use the new product, we are not likely to consider whether the older product may have been just as serviceable for our needs.

Of course, we should not infer that new products are always inferior to existing technology. However, we should realize that it may be worthwhile to evaluate new things more thoroughly before rushing out to buy them. It also means that it may not be wise to be the first on your block to buy the latest items.

This issue certainly applies to computers, but many other products may not be as perfect as they seem. We quietly accept their impediments, and this may be a mistake.

Typewriters

The typewriter marked a major advance in communications. Bad handwriting was no longer an issue, as typed documents were quite readable. Despite the vagaries of the QWERTY keyboard, the results were acceptable, and the poor typists – not the executives – had to deal with the inevitable technical problems.

The electric typewriter provided additional technology that reduced the number of typographical errors. However, these complex machines broke down more frequently than the older, mechanical typewriters. Although the keys in mechanical typewriters tended to get stuck, the machines did their jobs.

People complained about other aspects of manual typewriters. In new typewriters, the typed row was straight and clear. However, as the keys got stuck more and more, the row of typed material had its ups and downs. The results were no longer esthetically perfect. Newer electric typewriters compensated for this problem by using a delicate, breakable, and expensive flywheel, or an easily-replaceable but expensive golfball.

Both the electric and the manual typewriter provided immediate results. There was no need to stand in line and wait for your job to come out at the networked office printer. The printing aspect of the typewriter was always available and compatible with the typing aspect. Correction paper and liquid correction fluid fixed problems on the spot. Typists were more careful to hand in a perfect job, since the alternative would mean an annoying job of re-aligning the paper in the platen.

Multiple carbon copies were readily available, at a very low cost. Some offices used paper or letterhead that had carbon paper attached to it. Multiple copies were produced with no additional effort. Granted, corrections on the carbon copy were less than esthetic, but, again, this was the job of the typist, not of the executive.

Addressing an envelope was a whiz with a typewriter. Today's effort at inserting an envelope and finding and inserting the right address – or (horrors!) using a page of expensive labels – exhibit some of the less advantageous uses of a computer. As a result, some offices have regressed to writing out addresses by hand. Not even typed!

Today's word processors certainly produce esthetic copy. However, the overall picture certainly does not mark a quantum leap forward. The improvements are accompanied by a concomitant reduction in some older features, and the result is less welcomed than advertised.

For this reason, some offices still maintain at least one typewriter.

Cassette recorders

Many professionals choose to dictate their important correspondence and documents, so that a typist can transcribe them. In the first stage, a dedicated Dictaphone or cassette recorder did the job. It sometimes got jammed, and sometimes the tape would be partially inaudible, but offices did manage, and a good typist could often guess at the difficult sections, especially one who is familiar with the material and terminology.

Today's digital recorders do eliminate some of those problems. In addition, they can be sent by Internet to distant transcriptionists, and the sound quality is better. However, for some offices, the new technology is a step backwards.

A completed tape could be removed from the recorder and handed to a typist, without loading it to a USB port, copied to a computer, and then possibly copied again to the typist's computer. Digital systems work well when there are no problems, but when the recorder driver or the USB port fails, the urgent material would have to wait for a technician. Even the most skillful computer expert may not have been able to make the dictation become available right away if the driver disk was lost.

Can we legitimately call this situation progress? Wasn't it much better to have a more reliable tape, which could get the work get finished right away? Those well-touted advantages of digital recording were lost when the system did not work properly.

Similarly, the advantages of a great deal of modern technology are touted as great improvements, despite the fact that everything had been working well with older products. Perhaps they aren't really improvements, after all. Perhaps the old adage, "if it ain't broke, don't fix it," still has merit. Despite the tremendous progress made by new technology, we sometimes long for the older methods that worked right – the first time, and every time.