Sender: |
|
X-To: |
|
Date: |
Fri, 9 Jan 1998 12:23:44 -0800 |
Reply-To: |
|
Subject: |
|
From: |
|
Content-Transfer-Encoding: |
7bit |
Content-Type: |
text/plain; charset=us-ascii |
Organization: |
Trillium Resources Corporation |
MIME-Version: |
1.0 |
Parts/Attachments: |
|
|
A big problem is that any non-standard interface is inherently boggling
and untrusted by the users. I have seen this many times when Ihave
developed what I thought was a superior (text-based) user interface for
my software. Even though it is good, easy, fast, self-explanatory, ....
....there is some pretty large overhead cost to the learning curve of
getting someone to use any non-standard interface, so unless the
motivation and payoff are sufficient, you are not going anywhere with a
non-standard interface. Unfortunately, for my users, Windows defines
the standard.
Al
AdaWorks wrote:
> ...
> One could easily list hundreds of other occupations where windowing is
> not only unecessary but detrimental to actual productivity. For such
> applications it makes sense to develop for text-based video display
> terminals.
>
|
|
|