× The internal search function is temporarily non-functional. The current search engine is no longer viable and we are researching alternatives.
As a stop gap measure, we are using Google's custom search engine service.
If you know of an easy to use, open source, search engine ... please contact support@midrange.com.



On 12/2/05, Douglas W. Palme <dpalme@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> It is not just stubbornness Tom, it has a lot to do with how our business
> operates, what our goals are and what is the most cost effective way to
> reach them.

Poor word choice ("stubborn").. my apologies Doug.  I chose it based
on the apparent opposition to even having web-based access available
at all.

> Most of the web / graphical products I have seen require
> webshpere development studio which I personally consider a bloated hog of
> resources.

Assume that a company has to spend an extra $2000 per programmer per
year to make WDSc function properly.  The productivity improvements
from these tools are undeniable.  Given the salary of programmers, the
ROI is tremendous; it would be a bargain at 10x the cost.

> Our business (internally) is one that does not require fancy screens, mouse
> moves, popup windows, etc..  Our experience has also been that when you give
> such options to most (notice I did not say all) users they will invariably
> waste 15% of their computing time moving the mouse around, etc.  Yes, I am
> well aware that one can programmatically allow the user to use the tab key
> or field exit to move from field to field but I know from personal
> experience watching end users they will grab that mouse and waste time.  It
> is a distraction in my opinion.

For "heads-down" tasks, many web interfaces are terrible, although
AJAX has the capability to help change that.  But in a business
setting, only a few clerks are doing heads down data entry, while the
rest are running reports or going through several defined steps.  And
generally, those more complex functions are easier to use, easier to
train, and less prone to error when the interface is easy to navigate.

I disagree with the 15% less productive assertion. Would you be 15%
more productive with your email if it were a green screen app?  If
someone knows exactly what they are doing, then the green screen can
be faster.  But if the person is deciding as they go, graphical is
almost always more productive.

Why not have a good green screen order-entry screen for the order desk
people, but have a good gui for the accounting analysts, customer
service reps, and managers?

One last point .. gui interfaces are getting better.  Green screens
are stuck.  There has been a ton of usability research, and the
results are applied to Windows and X all the time, and they trickle
down quickly to the apps on those platforms.    There is lots of room
to improve green screen apps, even without the mouse.  But how many
RPG programmers read usability books .. as was noted here we can't
even get them to use productivity improvement tools for RPG coding.

> Of course you are free to formulate your own opinion and even disagree with
> me, or anyone else for that matter, this is just one man's opinion.
> Stubbornness? I would politely disagree, it is what fits our business needs.

Again, my apologies.  I should have made my point without the
pejorative language.

--
Tom Jedrzejewicz
tomjedrz@xxxxxxxxx


As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases.

This thread ...

Follow-Ups:
Replies:

Follow On AppleNews
Return to Archive home page | Return to MIDRANGE.COM home page

This mailing list archive is Copyright 1997-2024 by midrange.com and David Gibbs as a compilation work. Use of the archive is restricted to research of a business or technical nature. Any other uses are prohibited. Full details are available on our policy page. If you have questions about this, please contact [javascript protected email address].

Operating expenses for this site are earned using the Amazon Associate program and Google Adsense.