|
Hi DouglasFrom your comments I am getting the picture that all of your users have actual 5250 terminals in the office and don't do email, use web browsers, word processing, spread-sheeting or any other stuff that normally runs on a PC, is that right ? If you have these things then the genie is already out of the box.
As to users who play around with setting colours, arranging desktops or playing solitatire I couldn't agree with you more. However, in my experience, this kind of time waster will find a way to waste your time anyway, the issue isn't a technology issue, it's a human issue. If they can't play with the colours, they will make endless phone calls, fix staplers, mess around cleaning their desk or screen, or whatever it takes to avoid work. Most people might have a fiddle with the environmental settings at first to get familiar and comfortable with things but the novelty of constant change quickly wears off.
With regards to the direct cost of building this stuff. I wasn't suggesting that you go out and re-engineer all your applications over night, and I also wouldn;t dare to suggest that there is no cost attached to this. What I was suggesting was that one (one !) advantage to implementing a browser or GUI front end was that the end users would immediately be familiar with it, whereas this was not the case with a green screen. Every time you add staff you will experience the truth of this statement.
One of the benefits using a browser interface in particular exposes is that your data entry or application usage is no longer confined to your office, or restricted by the availability of the correct emulator. You can easily hire and train remote tele-workers to do your data entry or other input tasks; indeed as other people have pointed out, your customers and/or business partners can undertake this task as the interface is no longer an impediment to their doing your work for you. Using a browser also opens up the possibility of automated "other system" interactions with your system that previously required a keyboard and pair of hands, even without going all the way to a full on web service.
To put it another way, a lowest common denominator interface allows you to obtain an economy of scale for data entry or system interactions that is unavailable to you by using a specific and specialised interface that requires additional training in even basic operations. Not to mention the investment required to provide and use that interface (terminals, desks, emulators, office space, staff etc). The efficiency and ROI is not necessarily measured simply in man hours and the cost of your existing staff.
Having said all that, you have provided some pretty compelling counter arguments about your particular case, and it may be that you are an exceptions to the rule - at this point in time. Nevertheless, your own particular circumstances don't make the observations made about the advantages of GUI/browsers interfaces any less true. Don't let your situation right now stop you from looking at what will be right for you longer term. Catch up is a dangerous game to play with your business on the line.
Regards Evan Harris At 01:01 a.m. 4/05/2006, you wrote:
Without wanting to sound as if I am completely negative, I could not disagree with you more. I am of course only looking at this from the perspective of our industry, and more time is wasted playing with the g-d forsaken mouse and clicking on buttons than anything else I have ever seen. Whether the GUI is well designed or not is entirely beside the point, users like to play and with a green screen, which 90% of our business is entering and providing information to other employees and customers, we have far little of those issues and a hell of a lot more productivity. I am asked all the time why we do not have a "windows" application, and my standard response is "Why?" The overwhelming end user response is "Because it looks nicer". I am not in this for looks and trust me when I say it has nothing to do with functionality, it has to do with the fact there are no graphics and colorful screens and browsers, etc. I am only concerned (from an application standpoint) with functionality and productivity and from my somewhat limited and focused viewpoint, 5250 gives us everything we need to accomplish our goals and needs. That said, our unique position may not work for others. Douglas On Wed, 03 May 2006 16:49:45 +1200, Evan Harris wrote > Hi Tom > > I'm not sure I can agree with you 100% in your statement here :) > > One of the reasons a GUI (badly designed or otherwise) is perceived > as useful in the workplace is that most employees can these days be > counted on to be able to work a browser or Windows at the mechanical > level. Almost any person off the street will be familiar with these > technologies whereas the green screen is more than likely going to > be a mystery to them, and this becomes truer every day. > > With the high personnel turnover that is seen in many environments > employing casual or other types of staff, having a low training > requirement for your everyday applications is demonstrably a money saver. > > The GUI vs. green screen argument - at least in my mind - is as much > about having a lowest common denominator approach to data access and > input as it is about efficiency. > > Regards > Evan Harris > > >I am not sure if I agree with this or not. Clearly, re-engineering > >applications solely to convert to GUI interfaces is a waste of time > >and money, unless the UI improvements improve the application. > >However, if it is being done to position the application for future > >improvements, it may be a good investment. Also, I don't think that > >there is a whole lot of additional cost for the vehicles for a modern > >UI. Now Websphere is expensive, but there are alternatives. CGIDEV2 > >is free, the incremental cost of serving .NET is pretty small, and > >Tomcat is free. > > > > > I personally don't believe that there is a majority of folks out there > > > developing to good, modern UI principles. For every decent, > > > productivity-improving GUI app (in my opinion) there has got to be a > > > dozen or so mediocre collections of forms and programs developed by > > > "programmers" without much true application design education or > > > experience, and developed without the benefit of business analysis. > > > >Agreed, but irrelevant. First, remember that developers have to walk > >before they can run. Second, there are as many crappy green screen > >apps as there are crappy GUI apps. Writing off GUI development because > >many of the apps suck is muddied thinking. > > > >Take care. > > > >-- > >Tom Jedrzejewicz > >tomjedrz@xxxxxxxxx > > -- > This is the Midrange Systems Technical Discussion (MIDRANGE-L) > mailing list To post a message email: MIDRANGE-L@xxxxxxxxxxxx To > subscribe, unsubscribe, or change list options, visit: > http://lists.midrange.com/mailman/listinfo/midrange-l or email: > MIDRANGE-L-request@xxxxxxxxxxxx Before posting, please take a moment > to review the archives at http://archive.midrange.com/midrange-l. If you bought it, it was hauled by a truck - somewhere, sometime. -- This is the Midrange Systems Technical Discussion (MIDRANGE-L) mailing list To post a message email: MIDRANGE-L@xxxxxxxxxxxx To subscribe, unsubscribe, or change list options, visit: http://lists.midrange.com/mailman/listinfo/midrange-l or email: MIDRANGE-L-request@xxxxxxxxxxxx Before posting, please take a moment to review the archives at http://archive.midrange.com/midrange-l.
As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases.
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.
midrange.com
