3 ms·
My thought is that such interfaces are bad for learning software and for get a good overview. But when you're a power user of a certain system (like the data en
by iveqy 10y ago
My thought is that such interfaces are bad for learning software and for get a good overview. But when you're a power user of a certain system (like the data entry staff) there's nothing that's better.
- endgame 10y agoProbably correct. And given that you're spending a comparatively small amount of time in that learning phase, would you want it any other way?
- iveqy 10y agoI would prefer software that I use often to be hard to learn but easy to use. Seldom used software should instead be easy to learn, hard to use. I find that most software today is in the latter category.
- marktangotango 10y agoThe reality is the world has moved completely away from terminal. The speed and productivity advantages are well known, but no one cares. By no one, i mean sales and procurement who hold cobol/green screen apps in very low regard. In other words, it's very difficult to sell trerminal applications when the competition is browser based i.e. insurance claim processing
- yourapostasy 10y agoSell them what they demand with a browser-based presentation, then package the terminal-based presentation as a separate, paid add-on option for high-volume customers. Market the add-on as meant only for high-end customers who will take the time to train staff in the kind of high-speed entry that only the terminal-based presentation can keep up with. Sprinkle in some stats about some multiplier of efficiency and accuracy improvement, then let the customers implement what they prefer. Between advances in ML-based OCR and dictation, I anticipate future data entry to get much more sophisticated, and demand extremely low-latency, quick-updating screens that might bring about more awareness of terminal-based interfaces in some situations.