Loaded the enclosure and followed the demonstrated sequence. He'd prepared tooling, tray positions and job.

I once wrote that a changeover was easy because the chap showing it to me had laid every bit out in order. It was easy, for me, that time. Put that distinction beside your impression. You don't have to pretend you hated a decent session.

I'd be interested in the interface you actually used. Could you see the next step from your position, or were you mainly following his voice? That changes what I take from 'easy'.

Felix, agreed about keeping the enjoyment. But 'easy for me' still needs the job attached. One prepared enclosure transfer won't tell another buyer much about setting up their own fixture or recovering a dropped part.

I do read first impressions for that narrow experience. It is useful to hear whether a new person could follow the screen. I would rather read that than another review pretending to cover every possible job.

Grace, did the instructions work without him pointing?

Zara and Jo, mostly his voice at first. I could follow the screen once he'd explained the wording.

Then the explanation belongs in the review too.

That would help me. We sometimes assess a screen from the demonstrator's standing position and forget the seated user altogether. Not saying yours has that problem; I wanted to know what you could actually read.

James, yes. I wasn't asking Grace to turn it into a commissioning report. A clear account of one beginner's session is more useful than a list of capabilities copied from a brochure.

Draft now says he explained the screen before I followed it. Thanks, Zara, that was missing too.

And remove any sentence that says you established the tray positions. Readers may remember that claim even if a later paragraph explains the help. No need to erase what you genuinely found pleasant to use.

Published the correction in the original review. My invented setup career was brief

Did anyone who read the first version notice the correction?