The point is, sometimes you need a manager to keep the authoritarians and the servile classes, suitably lubricated. This guy pissed off someone who should know better, and eventually - thanks to middle management - did.
There are class lessons in the narrative. Still relevant.
Partners are owners. In law and financial fields, they are often very knowledgable and experts in their fields and know little about things like computers.
When I started computerizing a law firm in the early 90s, the only technology attorneys knew how to use was the telephone and the dictation machine -- and their automobiles, of course, which some attorneys used as a comparison for how they wanted their PCs to work.
Especially for older attorneys, computers and such were frightening (many attorneys had never touched a typewriter), and I think this accounts for a lot of these kinds of reactions. Many people in power are used to having their whims catered to, to having others support them -- the junior attorneys, secretaries, paralegals, word processing operators, accounting staff, etc.
Most of the complaints I remember weren't about the inner workings of the computer, but about UI. The automobile argument wasn't that drivers needed to undertand the ICE, but to understand steering wheel, gearshift, brake and throttle pedals, etc. The complaints I heard were mostly pre-1995 as well, before Windows started seriously overtaking DOS and UIs had relatively little in common between programs.
The guy wanted the manual, because he felt he needed to read the manual - but when it was explained to him that the junior IT guy would help him with whatever he needed, it calmed him down.
Its a generational thing. You may not feel it these days but there were indeed periods of computer evolution where it was, kind of important to read the manual. And, also, help the older generation get used to the new things.
