3 ms·

I think that would have to overcome the hurdle of not looking “serious”. Bloomberg terminals are multi-screen as standard, have a full window management enviro

I think that would have to overcome the hurdle of not looking “serious”. Bloomberg terminals are multi-screen as standard, have a full window management environment, make very heavy use of the keyboard and shortcuts (I believe they are mouse optional, I’ve only ever seen them demoed with just a keyboard). These things are also only ever used on leased lines or very high speed wired connections to reduce latency. The super fast trading is now mostly automated, so I suspect these productivity features are less important, and that a slick touch based UX could be better, but I think it would be tricky to convince people of that.

gumby 8y ago
> ...and that a slick touch based UX could be better, but I think it would be tricky to convince people of that. Why would a touch interface be better? The keyboard doesn't move or change state so you can type on it without looking (and your hands don't cover the display). You also don't move your hands so access to commands is extremely fast. Touch is good when you have an infrequently used interface or when the set of data are highly unstructured (e.g. selection in a photo editor). Neither would apply to these cases.