Slashdot Mirror
Balancing Use Between the Keyboard and Mouse?
initialE wonders: "A friend of mine, working for a bank, mentioned to me that she had just undergone training for the migration of applications from their legacy systems (think DOS-based interface, AS400 powered) to a snazzy new web application. Whereas the younger users were impressed by the bling it provided, the older users were less happy, and the reason provided was that the application lacked shortcut keys to doing their most common tasks. The newer staff were mighty pleased not to have to learn all those arcane commands, of course. This led me to consider a few things. I administer Windows-based systems, and more and more I am choosing to use whatever key-based interface is available - I don't even use the file explorer anymore, preferring to type 'WindowsKey+R', and typing in the file path (Windows helps with auto-complete). It's better for me to keep my hands on the keyboard and not touch the mouse. It's certainly not because my mouse is bad, I just don't want to release the focus on the keyboard. And it works - I get things done a lot faster than anyone else in my department. Have we placed too much emphasis on making GUI-based applications, and left behind what was a perfectly good way of doing things?"
bling makers themselves are so dazzled by their own creations they don't even bother to make keyboard accelerators for things like menus! I'm not even saying adding shortcut combos, just adding the underline on each menu item. Is it too much to ask? Apparently.
Way back when the Mac as new (mid '80s), Apple tries this with a stopwatch. People reported they were faster with the shortcut keys, but when forced to move their hand to the mouse they got the job done in half the time.
Now be careful about reading this - this was for a very specific task. Each task varies. However the point is that you need to make an objective measure before you can say one is better - sometimes your perceptions lie.
Part of this depends on how much training is worth. Phone operators (who do the same job for years on end, apparently switching jobs is/was rare) find it worthwile to learn command that save them 1/10 of a second, even though they need an all day training course to learn it. That command is something they do all day though (I don't know what the task is/was), so it is worth the phone companies money in the long run to train operators to use the shortcuts.
One advantage of shortcuts is even when there is no significant advantage, it allows some people to feel more elite than others. This can stoke their ego, and make them hang onto a bad job just to show the youngsters how "real men" do it.
Remember though this is a computer. You should be automating any task that you do often. Control-R, type (with completion) a command is not as fast as a shortcut key that starts that command in one touch. It may or may not be faster than putting an icon for that application on the desktop or in the taskbar. Remember to use a stopwatch to time this, not your gut feeling.
Some things are just easier and faster when done by keyboard, especially if done repeatedly. When editing text I far prefer to use keystrokes. The mouse is handy for exploring menus, pointing at things and context-sensitive stuff but when you know what you need to do a keyboard shortcut is invaluable. I also hate the horrible clutter of icons it most apps these days, I know though that once you learn where they are that's a useful way of packing in functionality. I just think its gone too far.
Certainly does help, we have telemarketers who use an autodialler connected to a button on an intranet site. They click the button, it routes the phone call to their workstation immediately. Before the autodialler they had to manually punch in the numbers, three things to swap between, phone-keyboard-mouse. After installing the auto-dialler (fixing up all the mis-dials), I removed as much of the mouse keyboard swapping that I could using button shortcuts and field jumps so they were primarily keyboard users, which works pretty well. The data entry is fairly straight forward, tab, enter, lots of typing, alt+whatever. But when they are faced with having to scroll down the screen because the form is just a touch to long to display all at once, they head towards the scroll wheel on the mouse. We've considered purchasing keyboards with a mousewheel tacked onto the side and some kind of trackball (their desk real estate is fairly limited) but we've come to the conclusion that they're happy the way they are now and it works.
Then again, sometimes I find myself typing in word then trying to use CTRL+K combinations...
Task Mangler
It appeals to reviewers, who simply can't invest the time required to master a steep learning curve.
It appeals to the people evaluating your software package for purchase, because again, they aren't going to spend a month learning to use something if they aren't already sure they're going to purchase it.
Convincing people that it's worth spending time learning anything is a Very Hard sell indeed. Look at your average high school for proof.
In order to do that, you need some whizzbang testimonials from fanatical users who will swear blind that your software product changed their lives. Otherwise, you are stuck selling to scientists and engineers who live by the principal that the steeper the learning curve, the better the tool.
it's a lot easier to train computer newbies with standardized "point-and-grunt" user interfaces than to make them learn complicated command syntaxes and file system conventions.
I fear for the survival of our race if those sort of things qualify as being "complicated."
These things seem "simpler" to people who learned to use computers early on. But by any objective standard, they just aren't.
I'd like to hear about these object standards of yours, because I object wholly to your statement. It depends, however, on whether you meant to say "commands are simpler than point-and-click" or "commands are simpler to long-time users than they are to people with objective standards."
Here is an objective example: to view all of the files in directory c:\foo\bar, you must type 'dir c:\foo\bar'. That is one step. Say you are using a GUI in standard Windows XP: "Start > My Computer > C: > foo > bar" That's 5 steps! The "complex" command structure involves simply typing an abreviated English word followed by the name of the directory. The GUI method can be given shortcuts, such as linking a shortcut to that directory or using the run function, but the former can be automated the same way on the command line using a batch file/command alias, and the latter requires that you type in the path and is therefore just as complex. Also, the dir command is accepted on more systems (example, 'dir [directory]' can work on anything from *nix to DOS to Windows to VMS natively and any other operating system with minimal modifications. GUI methods will differ profoundly from one platform to another.
Also, programming a GUI is more complex than any other kind of interface, and adding keyboard shortcuts is quite trivial. I never underestimate the laziness of programmers (I do this because I am one), and it's probably true that they don't bother to add them, but then that is a poor GUI they have just written.
I've noticed that I spend most of my time in Konsole/bash and Vim (CLI version). Vi had a really good keyboard interface for getting around quickly, and the hjkl method of moving around should be available in all programs if desired. Along with Vim, I'll be using less and man to read things, and thankfully those support the jk method of scrolling up and down.
When it comes to GUI apps, however, I mainly use Firefox, Thunderbird, Akregator, and amaroK. The two KDE applications are customisable with shortcut keys the same way all KDE applications usually are, and I know a bunch of the useful shortcuts with Firefox. Not only that, but mouse gestures are an absolute must in a GUI [web] browser, and AiO Gestures does that great.
The catch? I was born in the 80's; I didn't grow up with Unix (I started with Windows 3.1). Even with that, I still have found CLI programs to be a godsend.
'Yes, firefox is indeed greater than women. Can women block pops up for you? No. Can Firefox show you naked women? Yes.'
I'll stay away from GUI vs CLI when it comes to speed/ease of use etc, but here is one interesting point, I hadn't thought of before.
I did some consulting for a hotel chain, and I ended up talking to the front desk staff one night about their new very mouse-based GUI'ish reservation program. I had noticed that they spent a lot of time staring down at the screen and mousing, whereas at other hotels, the counter person would talk to the customer and make eye contact while only needing to briefly look at the screen.
The staff definately felt the emphasis on mousing had interfered with their ability to give good customer service and it wasn't just a learning curve - on a keyboard based system, they had eventually memorized enough keystrokes just from practise, that they didn't have to watch the screen all the time. But with a mouse you can *never* do that - a mouse *always* requires one hand and at least one eye.
imho
Part of the problem is the "standard" configuration of most workstations. Many people use a mouse that requires you to move one of your hands back and forth between it and the keyboard. One of the first lessons I learned when I got my first laptop was how much more efficient you can be with a touchpad just below the space bar. With this configuration the "mouse" is practically part of the keyboard. I've taken to purchasing desktop keyboards with this same configuration.
-Pascal