K.I.S.S.

I can't give you my opinion, your post is so vague:

1.-What do you mean by programmable thermostat?

2.-Is it a thermostatic valve for a cooling system?

3.-Is it a process controller or a temperature controller?

4.-Are the 37 steps actually steps to programming?

5.-Does it have the capability of programming stages of setpoint temperature over precise periods of time?

Please let us know, so we have something to start with. But I think I understand how you feel; 15 years ago I received one AC inverter in which manual they proudly claimed to have improved the drive's performance by adding "over 100 new programmable parameters..." go figure.

Yahlasit

lowest common denominator of the public.........well the would be a pre-programmed thermostat then..........p911

and if you notice they do try to do that in public rooms. The "lock" the thermostat so the "non-average" citizen can't change it.

Yet the public wants full control and some are not willing to either read the manual or try playing with it until they stop breaking it.

Interesting. I just purchased three digital thermostats for a rental property I'm renovating, that had FHW baseboard heat. It took some time to find the simple one that didn't "do" anything more than set the temperature and give a reading of the local temp! One of the sales people that I asked said I could just use the one that does heat and cool (and a bunch of other things) and just not hook up the cooling system wires. What do you think the first call from a tenant would be when they tried to turn the fan on for the baseboard FHW system?

Yeah - K.I.S.S.

#1. Completely misses the point, which is discussing the principal not the specifics.
I agree KISS.
When I write stuff, I carefully count key presses and as our products mature we generally remove features not add 'em.
So much stuff is just too complicated to use. If you need the manual, then the software isn't written well enough (unless of course it's some big complex system but not a damn 'stat)
I see plenty of product with a full touch screen or 16 char 2 line display which is more user hostile than the user interface I write for 3 buttons and a 16x1 display.
Classic case in point is the banking machines which take 2ⁿ (n being large and positive) button pushes to pay you credit card bill when to payoff the entire bill shouldn't need more than 2.
E.G A 'pay credit card' soft key. Then a 'Pay entire ballance' soft key, while the display shows the ballance.
It's not rocket science, but if you point it out or complain you are met with blank stares.
Oh and don't start me on the Sainsburies self service checkout
'Unexpected item in the bagging area'... no there damn well isn't I fully expect the item to be there, I put it there.
'Thank you for being patronised by poorly written software'
Del <click, rant mode off>

Del:

You're right, I was a little off, but at the end I kind of brushed the topic.

Yahlasit

Engineers running amuck!

My peeve is the little icons with no text explanations. With the tiny screens on cell phones, these have become ubiquitous. Does the vaguely cellphone-like icon with two arcs radiating from it mean I'm on speaker, or did I just get a call, or a text message, or should I not hold the phone near my head because the radiation is peaking?

I'm not sure who thought it was a good idea to have multi-level menus in call handling and automated customer service. What truly amazes me is that companies eat the cost of this because the customer is typically calling a toll free number. If I call a bank, phone company or cable company, I'm going to tie up a line for at least half an hour just navigating menus.

Interested parties should read or browse The Design of Everyday Things, by Donald Norman. Incidentally, he's a high-level staffer at Apple. The book is dated and gets dry in parts, but it provides a strong basis in how to design things that humans can do things with. The principles extend beyond and through electronics and software.

(I never realized how badly light switches suck until I read that book, but they do suck.)

This is a personal crusade of mine, having designed software for decades and now working (again) in the defense industry. I think the worst offenders are programs written for weapon systems. The attitude seems to be that we'll just provide training, and that we're spending tax money, so making it "nice" and "easy" aren't a priority. Tell that to a pilot or a grunt surrounded by enemies who want to kill him/her, who requires every available neuron to complete their mission. Someone in danger or other stress can't spare the brainpower, mouse click or keypress to work around a klunky user interface.

I agree with the K.I.S.S principle. When I wanted a cell phone just so I could keep in touch with my wife while commuting I asked for a cheap model that just made phone calls, no texting, photos, internet, music or games require. Nope those don't exist anymore and I was offered what the sales clerk described as the most basic model, and the instruction book was 175 pages.

Forget it, nothing I have to say is so important that it can't wait until I get home.