Bob Bridges wrote, in part: >When I first started reading the reasons we should all adopt Windows, >two of the reasons didn't impress me. One was the "consistent user >interface". I'd been using WordPerfect, Lotus 1-2-3, Harvard Graphics >etc, and of course the mainframe, and I didn't see any difficulty >about using <PF3> for END on one and <F3> for "find again" in another. >I still don't. Consistent interface is fine, but it's not a necessity >in my view.
I'm a keyboard guy, like most folks here, but have to disagree: UI consistency is a huge productivity enhancer for some of us. The fact that "modern" web pages often do NOT follow ~20 years of web conventions is very irritating. Heck, even Microsoft can't follow its own standards half the time-look at Teams, where navigation is bizarre and doesn't follow any of the MDI rules. That's one of the points of a GUI: you shouldn't have to explain it. In fact, there's a saying I'm a firm believer in: "A GUI is like a joke: if you have to explain it, it's not very good." I could show you examples from companies I might or might not work for that are just appalling-a large part of every meeting where one is used comprises people suggesting things that "might work" to do the very basic task the person driving the screen is attempting. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
