I've seen blind people be very productive with a keyboard. Mouse? No. On Fri, Jan 29, 2021, 06:25 Bob Bridges <[email protected]> wrote:
> This is fascinating, and not a little disturbing. I have long understood > that keyboard shortcuts that save me immense quantities of time won't help > a coworker who won't take the time to learn them deep down, simply because > he has to stop and think about what key sequence is the next step, while I > (who've been doing it longer) can "just do it". (Actually this can be > applied to almost any task, not just keyboard shortcuts.) So if I want to > eliminate all duplicate values in an Excel column, I can execute all the > steps in ten or fifteen seconds; but once I've explained to my boss how to > do it, and he understands it, it'll still take him 60 or 120 seconds until > he's done it often enough. > > But this quotation would have me believe that the time I save by being > familiar with the process is illusory. Is that possible? It seems to me > that when I want to select a row in Excel, I don't have to think about > which key sequence to find; my fingers hit <Shift-space> without conscious > intervention. But the horrible plausibility of the below claim lies in the > fact that I DON'T THINK ABOUT DOING IT - which is just what your article > said. > > ...Nah, I don't buy it anyway. Any complicated task we learn, say driving > a car or playing your favorite X-box action game, involves becoming > familiar with commands and combinations of buttons that get us killed > multiple times at first - I hope that doesn't apply to your driving, but it > certainly does when learning to play EVE Online or Rainbow 6 - until you > realize at some point that you're no longer thinking about the buttons as > such: You experience a strong impulse to dodge right and raise shields, > and both events occur, by magic apparently. > > Come to think of it, this is how we notice we're finally learning a > language, too: I hear something and understand it without translating it, > or realize that I've just said it without having to think out how. > > Still, you've got me a just a little worried.... > > --- > Bob Bridges, [email protected], cell 336 382-7313 > > /* ...in your bedchamber do not curse a king, and in your sleeping rooms > do not curse a rich man, for a bird of the heavens will carry the sound, > and the winged creature will make the matter known. -Ecclesiastes 10:20 */ > > -----Original Message----- > From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List <[email protected]> On Behalf > Of Pew, Curtis G > Sent: Thursday, January 28, 2021 11:24 > > The context was comparing command-key sequences to clicking buttons or > selecting menu items. Remembering the command-key sequence takes as long as > moving the mouse, but the brain doesn’t perceive the time passing while > remembering, while it does perceive the time passing while manipulating the > mouse. > > -----Original Message----- > From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List <[email protected]> On Behalf > Of Pew, Curtis G > Sent: Thursday, January 28, 2021 11:17 > > The point is subjective time is heavily dependent on cognitive engagement: > > “People new to the mouse find the process of acquiring it every time they > want to do anything other than type to be incredibly time-wasting. And > therein lies the very advantage of the mouse: it is boring to find it > because the two-second search does not require high-level cognitive > engagement. > > “It takes two seconds to decide upon which special-function key to press. > Deciding among abstract symbols is a high-level cognitive function. Not > only is this decision not boring, the user actually experiences amnesia! > Real amnesia! The time-slice spent making the decision simply ceases to > exist. > > “While the keyboard users in this case feels as though they have gained > two seconds over the mouse users, the opposite is really the case. Because > while the keyboard users have been engaged in a process so fascinating that > they have experienced amnesia, the mouse users have been so disengaged that > they have been able to continue thinking about the task they are trying to > accomplish. They have not had to set their task aside to think about or > remember abstract symbols. > > “Hence, users achieve a significant productivity increase with the mouse > in spite of their subjective experience.” > > --- On Jan 28, 2021, at 9:41 AM, Seymour J Metz <[email protected]> wrote: > > What tasks were they measuring? I suspect that with a good interface the > keyboard is more productive for some tasks and the mouse more productive > for others. > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, > send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
