Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
GUI Software

Balancing Use Between the Keyboard and Mouse? 121

Posted by Cliff from the *gasp*-someone-used-'bling'-in-a-sentence dept.
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?"
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Balancing Use Between the Keyboard and Mouse? More

Balancing Use Between the Keyboard and Mouse?

Comments Filter:

  • GUI-CLI (Score:5, Informative)

    by daeley ( 126313 ) on Wednesday November 23, 2005 @10:18PM (#14105412) Homepage
    I have to agree that we have placed too much emphasis on the GUI where a nice key command would suffice. On OS X, I can't survive without Quicksilver [slashdot.org], which has been referred to as a GUI CLI, combining the best of both. It can also function as a sort of "glue app," interfacing between Terminal programs and GUI apps.

    • Re:GUI-CLI (Score:3, Informative)

      by daeley ( 126313 )
      Apparently, I also can't survive without putting the protocol in the URL: http://quicksilver.blacktree.com/ [blacktree.com]
    • being a vi user, i can't stand taking my hands off the keyboard to do mundane tasks .. and so i agree with you, only i use launchbar [obdev.at] instead of quicksilver, because its generally faster, and was there first, and i registered it pretty much straight away..

      the combination of launchbar, Terminal.app (loading my own window settings layout), Finder (when its needed) and the rest of the OSX GUI experience means that i only really use my mouse when i have to; certainly not all the time, only when its really neede
      • I've been using vim for a while now and have discovered myself getting really impatient with other text editors, or even text fields in browsers, without my favorite movement, deletion, and other shortcuts. Makes mutt seem even more attractive since I can use vi for its editor.

        I've got a few links here [celsius1414.com] for how-tos on setting bash in vi mode (set -o vi) and subsequent usage, and setting up Firefox with vi/vim keybindings.

        And as I mentioned the other day, I knew I had gotten thoroughly adjusted to using vim w
        • I suppose we're eternal enemies because I'm an emacs user, but I'm in basically the same state as you.

          Fortunately, my pal Steve Jobs listened to me(*), and as a result you'll see popular emacs shortcut control keys in all Cocoa text boxes, including the one in Safari I'm using right now.

          I can use Control-N, P, F, B, etc. Pity I can't use Control-S, but you can't win 'em all.

          Of course I'll never use FireFox or Opera more than casually since they use their own Windows-style widgets and as a result the Cocoa
          • Of course I'll never use FireFox or Opera more than casually since they use their own Windows-style widgets and as a result the Cocoa keyboard commands don't work :-(.

            Have you tried Camino?

            http://www.caminobrowser.org/ [caminobrowser.org]

            New beta versions out are reportedly spiffy.
            • Okay, just for fun, I took your advice and am now using Camino.

              Not for long, sadly. The control keystrokes do not work within the editing window, so I guess they're using the FireFox widgets, not Apple's.

              It does use a few of Apple's - the <select> element works in an Apple-style way, as do the preview and submit buttons, but the text box appears to be FireFox's.

              Pity :-(.

              D

  • the problem is (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday November 23, 2005 @10:26PM (#14105444)
    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.
    • I tend to agree. I recently designed a web-based reporting system for a company. I worked directly with one of the people who would be a user of the system, and she was used to the efficiency of DOS keyboard-based entry. That was fine with me, I hate using the mouse for a lot of data entry as well. So I used a little bit of Javascript and modelled the keyboard shortcuts for data entry off of her experiences with other software they use (which would have been similar to everyone else working there). Besides

  • Uhm... (Score:1, Insightful)

    by joto ( 134244 )
    Have we placed too much emphasis on making GUI-based applications, and left behind what was a perfectly good way of doing things?"

    Yes.

    • Re:Uhm... (Score:3, Insightful)

      by adminsr ( 919472 )
      It's very much an issue of preference. Windows has got it right: visual, mouse-click interface combined with plenty of shortcuts. When people have choices, they're happy.

      • Re:Uhm... (Score:1, Funny)

        by Anonymous Coward
        Options? A response that doesn't try and feed the fuel of one side or the other to continue the debate?

        I must be on the wrong website.
      • No it is not "preference".

        At all.

        Both webapps and ordinary apps are very awkward to use,
        probably because that people lack knowledge of how a
        real application should work.

        Webapps fails because it lacks all conveniences that comes
        with a decent modern GUI toolkit.

        Ordinary apps fails because the programmer have misinterpreted
        the model. Most GUI widgets are mainly targeted for popups and
        wizards, but the programmer is more or less expected to do the
        actual main interface himself.

        Example; think of Microsoft Excel, i
      • It's very much an issue of preference. Windows has got it: visual, right mouse-click interface combined with plenty of shortcuts. When people have choices, they're happy.

        Fuxed.

  • Poetic responce (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Leroy_Brown242 ( 683141 ) on Wednesday November 23, 2005 @10:30PM (#14105464) Homepage Journal
    "The command line is like writing a poem, while using a mouse is like pointing and grunting"
    Er, something like that.

    I like both, both have thier place.
    Some times click click and being done with something is great, while other times having a command line to type EXACTLY what you want is a life saver.

    To me, it's all about what you want to do.
    Chat (irssi for irc and bitlbee) is command line if possible.
    Web design (Dreamweaver MX 2004) is a good balance. Point, click, edit code, flex the geek and the mouse.
    Graphic design (GIMP) is almost 100% mouse for me. GIMP and World of Warcraft are the reason I bought a trackball.

  • At work it is much easier to use keyboard shortcuts, because even though some of the software we use for writing reports don't allow even simple functions like cut and paste via a right-click, the keyboard shortcuts (i.e., CTRL-X and V) will work.

    Of course, we also use software that won't allow word wrap over multiple lines. I think that cost extra.

  • It's not the Gui per se... (Score:3, Informative)

    by hackwrench ( 573697 ) <hackwrench@hotmail.com> on Wednesday November 23, 2005 @10:32PM (#14105477) Homepage Journal
    At least not the Windows Interface part. It is completely feasable to have a windows interface with lots of well defined key commands. Autohotkey [autohotkey.com] is a good tool for this sort of thing, and the source is available for free as well.

  • Yes and no... (Score:4, Interesting)

    by bluGill ( 862 ) on Wednesday November 23, 2005 @10:32PM (#14105478)

    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.

    • Why bother timing this stuff? It's pointless. You'll have a bunch of useless data. It's not like they only have 8k of memory and don't have room to store the procedures for the hotkeys or something. They've got modern machines. Support both. That way the users can do it how they want to do it instead of how the arrogant UI designer that knows better thinks they should do it.
    • apple+n

      new folder

      do the same thing in windows..
      • Hmm... I don't have a windows machine handy at the moment, but I believe that it's something like "Shift-F10, N, Enter", or something similar... But yeah, you're basically right...

      • Actually, I don't find this to be all that difficult on Windows. Just Alt-F, W, F. Admittedly it is a couple more keystrokes than the Apple version... but I can do it really fast, so it doesn't affect me.

        (In fact, I spend most of my time waiting for Windows to catch up when I make the folder...)
      • Command N - new finder window.

        Command Shift N - new folder.

    • Re:Yes and no... (Score:2, Interesting)

      by two_socks ( 516862 )
      I think you have an important point ... the speed increase a user feels when using the keyboard vs. the mouse may be completely imaginary.

      But, I have been in the position the original poster describes. I worked in a bank that rolled out a browser based front end for an AS400 terminal app. I could help a customer with a complex request using the terminal before a new person with the browser could even have the customer info pulled up.

      The difference was that I was using a keyboard interface for a system t

      • Apple latter admitted they chose a task that was specifically easier with a mouse.

        I can't recall exactly, but I think it was replace a sentence in a document, where it starts in the middle of one line and continues onto the next, but there is more after it. Most keyboard shortcuts do not work as well for the replacement.

      • That raises a very good point as far as support is concerned. I find it' s much easier to support someone using a command line or terminal app - you just tell them what to type and when to press enter, and they can just read the response.

        With a browser app, you're constantly having to describe the screen:

        "OK, now do you see a little button that looks like a magnifying glass"

        "Yes, do I press that?"

        "No, press the one next to it that I can't describe because I have no idea what flavour of crack our designers w
      • If you're interested in the issue, you might find info about it on Plan 9 webpage (sorry, I don't have time for that) - something preciselly about mouse vs. keyboard controversy (started from the fact that Plan 9, unlike Unix, requires some use of mouse). You'll have short summary and links to research there.

        Basically, when averaging all and looking at most common tasks, mouse is, in reality, much faster, HOWEVER keyboard is almost universally reported as faster. Reason? Mouse and keyboard usages occupie di
    • I remember reading something about that as well. Keyboard users felt that performing the task with the keyboard took less time than with the mouse, whereas it was actually the other way round. The reason given in the study was that using the keyboard involves a lot of short actions, while the GUI version is fewer, longer actions, which skewed the users' judgement of time.

  • Keyboard navigability (Score:3, Interesting)

    by neillewis ( 137544 ) on Wednesday November 23, 2005 @10:38PM (#14105507)
    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.
    • you used a good word there: "exploring".

      CLI is great for stuff you do all the time, but today there are many more different things people do with their computers than back in 1995. copy a file from floppy, open word processor, write away? using a mouse for that would be such a waste of time.

      today people who are averagely accustomed with their GUI system can casually do email, IM, voip, filesharing, cd burning and a ton of other things without ever having read a manual (that the world might be better off if

  • Question (Score:2, Funny)

    by countach ( 534280 )

    >Have we placed too much emphasis on making GUI-based applications, and left behind
    >what was a perfectly good way of doing things?

    Yes.

    Next question for the guru to answer?

  • Easy To Use VS Easy to Learn (Score:5, Insightful)

    by p2sam ( 139950 ) on Wednesday November 23, 2005 @10:42PM (#14105528)
    This is a classic example of Easy to Use VS Easy to Learn.

    Modern UI designers have an unfair bias towards designing for the new user. The emphasis is to make the new user get up to speed as painlessly as possible. In other words, the design of the inerface should cater for "Easy to Learn". This is a fundamental principle in modern user interface design.

    Now. "Easy to Use" is not the same thing as "Easy to Learn". They are not necessarily orthongonal, but they tend to be. So while your new graphical application is easy to learn for the new user, the experienced power user finds it cumbersome to use. Note that a easy to use application can take a long time to master. For example, all the short cut keys in your old application requires effort and time to memorize.

    The standard argument is that if the application is hard to learn, people won't buy it. Therefore, if we need to sacrifice ease of use, for the sake of ease of learning, so be it.
    • I agree with the parent. Applications are designed for people to be able to pop in and out of with relative ease. For people who use vi all the time, its keyboard commands are no problem and make them feel powerful and productive (and they are). But I find myself fighting to do the simplest things when I have to use it, things that I have no problem doing in my native environment. Microsoft Office has conditioned people to expect a lot of clear icons and easily intelligible commands that will let them d
    • 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 fanati
    • Windows had this figured out for a long time. Nearly everything that you did with the mouse, would *tell* you how to do it with the keyboard. Menus had underlines and accelerator keys. Buttons had tooltips.

      I've recently made the switch to OS X, and this is one of the few aspects of Windows that I miss.
      • And this is why I laugh LOUD when people say that the Mac GUI is better than windows.

        Sam
      • I've recently made the switch to OS X, and this is one of the few aspects of Windows that I miss.

        Not *quite* the same thing, but if you go to the Keyboard & Mouse System Preference, then to the Keyboard Shortcuts tab, you'll find at the bottom "Full Keyboard Access" -- change that to All Controls and you'll be able to tab to most controls. In that same Preference tab you'll find a metric crapload of navigation shortcuts for moving keyboard focus among windows, Dock, menus, etc.

        Also, there are a ton of s

      • Re:Easy To Use VS Easy to Learn (Score:4, Informative)

        by tolldog ( 1571 ) on Thursday November 24, 2005 @05:45AM (#14106805) Homepage Journal
        Here is a list of shortcuts.

        http://docs.info.apple.com/article.html?artnum=754 59 [apple.com]

        Also, most menus have key shortcuts listed on the Mac, and the best part is the consistancy between applications on what the shortcuts mean and do.

        I actually find myself using shortcuts more in OSX than I did in Windows.
        • My point is not that OS X lacks shortcuts, but rather that the very act of using the Windows gui teaches you the shortcuts. You basically cannot *help* but learn the shortcuts for the actions you do frequently. On OS X, you must
          1. Know where to look,
          2. Figure out which ones are frequent enough to memorize, and
          3. use them enough to commit them to memory.

          BTW, I challenge you to try to navigate through a typical software installation process on OS X without using the mouse. I never did find a way to move the focus b

    • Whilst you are correct that power users are sometimes poorly served, you should be aware that the majority of users are either new, or dont use the application enough to make the shortcuts useful, or use so many different applications that shortcuts are not the same between applications.

      For example:
      My Typical applications i use in a week are:
      3270 emulator
      Firefox
      Word
      jEdit
      Outlook
      File explorer/manager
      Media Player Classic
      cygwin
      calculator
      gimp

      With a possibility of 10*26*3 (apps*keys*modifiers) >1000 possible a
    • Once upon a time I was a Wordstar jock (back when the glaciers were just beginning to retreat), when the Uni standardized on WordPerfect. I thought ( and still do ) that a user interface that required me to continuously remove my hands from the keyboard to hit a function key was just broken.

      What amazes me is that with the prevalence of laptops, we're basically back to the keyboard layout that inspired the Wordstar command set, yet our software presumes we have an acre of keyboard real-estate, and room f
      • Shut up... You had me at ... Emacs???!!!! WTF??!!! Blasphemy!!

        Kidding aside, I have a feeling that text editors as we know them, Emacs/Vim, will go down the same path as WordStar and WordPerfect 5.1. :(
  • For applications that you are only going to uses a few times a month or less, like applications for home use, having a mouse based interface is okay.

    For applications, like these bank teller application, where the uses will be using it as thier full time job, keyboard shortcuts are a must. They even make keyboard with extra keys design for heavy use.

    The application developers who created it and the people at the bank who approved it should be fired.
    • Agreed. We have an arcaic mainframe based application for change management; I barely struggle by on it, but the change management team shoot through with various arcane shortcuts. There are some vague plans to move to a web based system which will probably slow down the CM team and speed up everyone else...

  • Web developer stupidity (Score:5, Informative)

    by Bogtha ( 906264 ) on Wednesday November 23, 2005 @10:46PM (#14105544)

    Okay, if the users wanted keyboard shortcuts, why didn't the web developers include them? It's not as if HTML doesn't have support for this. [w3.org]

    A properly constructed GUI application should be just as usable with the keyboard as older applications. Web applications throw up a couple of minor hurdles, but no real showstoppers. The question seems pointless because you can have the best of both worlds easily.

    • Okay, if the users wanted keyboard shortcuts, why didn't the web developers include them?

      Two great reasons:

      • Lack of standard available key combinations ; If I binded an action to accesskey F, chances are it'd spawn the File menu. The only "sure" keys are the numbers; there is more or less a standard, access key 1 for home, 3 for sitemap, 4 for search, 9 for a contact form, 0 for accessibility statement... That does not leave lots of keys for original purposes;
      • Carelessness of web developers ; 99%
      • If I binded an action to accesskey F, chances are it'd spawn the File menu.

        Just for the record - in IE6, Firefox/Win and Firefox/X11, if you bind a key to accesskey F it overrides the Alt+F that would otherwise bring up the file menu (In Windows you can still hit F10 to browse the menus with the keyboard).

    • Wikipedia does this, and it drives me batty since I normally use the keyboard shortcuts built into MacOS X for editing text fields (as I mentioned elsewhere in this thread, they're my old emacs keystroke friends).

      Please don't do this to me. Leave my keyboard alone when I'm in a textbox, or I'll really, really hate your application.

      D
    • A good example of accesskeys is Legend of the Green Dragon [lotgd.net], a web-based game inspired by an old BBS game, which is probably why it has accesskeys. Notice the links on the left: Create a character, List warriors, Privacy Policy, etc. Each one uses both accesskeys on the links (to enable ALT-letter) and an onKeyPress handler with the crucial code:

      if (target.nodeName.toUpperCase()=='INPUT' || target.nodeName.toUpperCase()=='TEXTAREA' || altKey || ctrlKey)

      This allows you, if you wish, to remove the accesskeys

  • This is where KDE shines: everything can be done by the keyboard. Qt makes it really easy to use keyboard bindings, so its required to be able to do almost anything with a keyboard.

    In the konqueror 3.5 branch pressing ctrl gives a shortcut to all the links on the page, so you can do total browsing without a mouse--very useful.

    For things like that, KDE tends to be alot better than Windows.
  • 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

  • the answer to your question.. (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday November 23, 2005 @11:06PM (#14105626)

    Have we placed too much emphasis on making GUI-based applications, and left behind what was a perfectly good way of doing things?

    YES. Next question?

    Seriously, this is a classic example of a common problem in IT. The problem is called "not having a fucking clue". Instead of objectively determining what the best solution to a problem is, people just use whatever they know. All they know is web apps, so that's what they create.

    For repetitive, screen-oriented tasks, where the interface is stable, and the user can be trained ahead of time, a simple text GUI with keyboard shortcuts is almost always more efficient and therefore cost-effective. Of course, you shouldn't assume this without objective measurements (use a stopwatch, as the poster above suggested), but in my experience it's true.

    Haven't you ever seen a receptionist or a teller staring at her screen, moving her hands from the "mousing position" (one hand on the mouse, one on the keyboard) to the "keyboard position" (touch-typing position) and back again? She enters some data, uses the mouse to get to the next field or screen, goes back to entering data.. and it takes twice as long as it should.

    Some of this is lack of training of course ("with our snazzy web-based interface, you DON'T NEED to train" .. yeah, what bullshit.. how about telling her about the Tab key for instance?).. but much of it is the stupid interface.

    Not to mention that now instead of display and keyboard, employees now need display, keyboard, and MOUSE .. it gets gunked up, it falls off the desk, it breaks and needs to be replaced.

    Some tasks are good for the mouse, but data entry, and/or paging through screens is not one of them. For that you just need a text UI (with appropriate use of color) and a reliable keyboard.

    Usually the best thing to do is ask the experienced users who are already efficient on the old system: "what do you think of the new system"? Which I believe you did.. Of course, most companies don't seem to bother with that...

    • Haven't you ever seen a receptionist or a teller staring at her screen, moving her hands from the "mousing position" (one hand on the mouse, one on the keyboard) to the "keyboard position" (touch-typing position) and back again?

      This is where the pointing stick found on all IBM ThinkPads really shines. Instead of moving my hand I just move my right index finger from the J key to in between G and H. On laptops without the stick, I find that even glidepoints which let you use your thumb are way better than a m
  • I particularly like the alt-F4 keyboard shortcut in Windows.

    You can walk up to the average Windows user, who is leaving his/her keyboard unguarded, and hit alt-F4 four or five times and every app and window is closed, and the machine is at the prompt to shut down.

    What's particularly fun about this is the way the Windows user desperately clings to the mouse while it's happening.

  • Have we placed too much emphasis on making GUI-based applications, and left behind what was a perfectly good way of doing things?

    You correctly perceive a big problem. But you're letting a secondary issue confuse things. There's a good reason GUIs took over: 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. These things seem "simpler" to people who learned to use computers early

    • 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,

      • On the one hand you insist that anybody should know how to compose a DOS command line. On the other hand, you can't handle the more basic skill of creating a grammatically correct English sentence. Kind of proves my point.

        • That is ad hominem.

          • Wrong. "Ad hominem" would be if I said, "You're a Freemason, and Freemasons never know what they're talking about." I simply pointed out that his argument exhibited the very "What I know how to do is simple" fallacy that I had previously talked about.

            • Wrong. "Ad hominem" would be if I said, "You're a Freemason, and Freemasons never know what they're talking about."

              Saying I'm wrong because of that example is denying the antecedent ("If your statement were this, it would be ad hominem. It is not this, therefore it is not ad hominem."). You're not telling me that your argument is not ad hominem, but instead you're telling me that different one is.

              I provided a valid argument and gave examples to support it. You did not address any of my points, but s

              • Before you go around quibbling with other people's arguments, take a closer look at your own. Your definitions of "ad hominem" and "denying the antecedent" are pure horseshit.

  • The age old debate between GUIs and CLIs (Score:5, Insightful)

    by stickb0y ( 260670 ) on Wednesday November 23, 2005 @11:37PM (#14105740)

    Ah, the age old debate between GUIs and CLIs.

    This isn't anything new. People have been discussing this for a long time. It's pretty well known that GUIs are better for some tasks and CLIs are better for others. Rather than trying to proclaim that one is dead, people really should work on making them work better together.

    Anyhow. Until people start making more advances in that arena, in the meantime, I've found that using a keyboard with an integrated TrackPoint works great. (You can find old IBM ones on eBay or get some from pckeyboards.com.) Any modern OS supports multiple input pointing devices, so if you need to do a lot of mousing but only a little bit of typing, you still can have a normal mouse available to you. If, however, you need to do a lot of typing but only a little bit of mousing, you can keep your fingers at your keyboard the whole time. It's the best of both worlds, and I think all keyboards should come like this.

    • Green data entry screens arent CLI. This is nothing to do with CLI. Its a question of Windows programmers ignoring keyboard use in data entry applications.

      I deal with this problem big time. Our organization replaced a DOS based Pension Fund accounting program with a Progress based Windows-looking GUI program. And it sucks enormously in usability. eg [and i found this stuff withion an hour of turning it on.

      No alt+letter combos to access menus. well no identified ones. sometimes if you guess right one wi

  • AutoHotKey and AutoIt are a complete solution. (Score:3, Informative)

    by Futurepower(R) ( 558542 ) on Wednesday November 23, 2005 @11:46PM (#14105758) Homepage
    Here's a complete solution for Windows:

    Use AutoHotkey [autohotkey.com] to make keyboard shortcuts to run programs and enter text.

    Use AutoIt to simulate keyboard entries and mouse clicks and when you need complicated decision-making. Download AutoIt with the SciTE auto-completion IDE [autoitscript.com]. The SciTE editor makes writing and testing AutoIt programs and compiling the finished results very easy.

    Both these programs are very sophisticated, the best available, and FREE. AutoHotKey comes with source code. Both are programmable.

    For example, I've written an AutoHotKey program that uses a shortcut to toggle between Windows shortcut keys and WordStar/Brief control-key editing commands. I like to avoid taking the time to touch the mouse.

    AutoIt is great for automating installations of software.

    Both allow programming your own GUIs.

    Don't forget to contribute to these efforts.
  • My company uses SAP, which many here will be familiar with. The GUI we originally started out with required the use of the pull down file menu or a fast path to reach the desired function. In the versions released in the last 3-4 years however, they converted the file menu to a menu tree in the main body of the screen. The fast paths are still an option, but the file menu is not. To navigate the tree, it is quicker to use the mouse, but not as quick as I could call up the same function with the old pull dow
  • I started using computers ca. 1978. Never had any problem with RSI until I got a mac, which meant using the mouse all the time. Then I started having bad pain in my mouse arm. I switched to editing using plain text-mode emacs (no mouse), and the RSI never came back. YMMV.
  • "Have we placed too much emphasis on making GUI-based applications, and left behind what was a perfectly good way of doing things?"

    No. What we've left behind is the concept that specialized keystrokes are somehow only available in contrast to a kickass GUI. Designing a better GUI and maintaining its layout through multiple versions makes sure it's easier to train more people on an application. If you're only expecting or need 20 people to use an app, by all means - make them learn specialized keystrokes.

  • This may sound really out there, but I do not know. What I want is a CLI based GUI. I have searced the ncurses area and found nothing. I would really like a CLI interface that ran a GUI. Imagine one that is run by hitting a key combo to resize a window, move it around and/or close it. Multiple windows, a "toolbar", to 'key-click' on and (%*dream*%) interpreted X11 on the fly - run an X11 session with full GUI through a ssh connection - W/O running X11 locally. Upshot if this makes no sense - I would love to

  • My main programs are still CLI... (Score:3, Interesting)

    by jZnat ( 793348 ) on Thursday November 24, 2005 @02:16AM (#14106304) Homepage Journal
    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.

  • Eye Contact vs GUI (Score:2, Interesting)

    by Anonymous Coward
    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
    • Another good point with mouse based interfaces is that it now takes between thirty and forty-five seconds longer for me to pay for a pizza than if a cash register style point of sale machine was used. It's a bit annoying to stand there for a minute with correct change to buy a single item while the counter staff is staring at a screen and moving a mouse about.

  • Use both at the same time. (Score:1, Funny)

    by Anonymous Coward
    Seriously... Just use your feet to control mouse and never get your hand off from the keyboard. It works better with Macs with a single button.

  • The Rootless Root (Score:5, Funny)

    by nickco3 ( 220146 ) on Thursday November 24, 2005 @03:12AM (#14106448)
    Master Foo Discourses on the Graphical User Interface

    One evening, Master Foo and Nubi attended a gathering of programmers who had met to learn from each other. One of the programmers asked Nubi to what school he and his master belonged. Upon being told they were followers of the Great Way of Unix, the programmer grew scornful.

    "The command-line tools of Unix are crude and backward," he scoffed. "Modern, properly designed operating systems do everything through a graphical user interface."

    Master Foo said nothing, but pointed at the moon. A nearby dog began to bark at the master's hand.

    "I don't understand you!" said the programmer.

    Master Foo remained silent, and pointed at an image of the Buddha. Then he pointed at a window.

    "What are you trying to tell me?" asked the programmer.

    Master Foo pointed at the programmer's head. Then he pointed at a rock.

    "Why can't you make yourself clear?" demanded the programmer.

    Master Foo frowned thoughtfully, tapped the programmer twice on the nose, and dropped him in a nearby trashcan.

    As the programmer was attempting to extricate himself from the garbage, the dog wandered over and piddled on him.

    At that moment, the programmer achieved enlightenment.

    Courtesy of the Rootless Root [catb.org]
    • The Unix acolyte asked the master, "Why are so many interfaces designed graphically when command line interfaces are so much more powerful?"

      Master Baz said nothing, but typed a few commands into his terminal and turned up his speakers.

      "What do you want me to type?" yelped an elderly woman.

      "C as in carl, D as in david, then a space bar, then the slash key on the same key as the question mark."

      "What?"

      "C as in carl, D as in david, then a space bar, then the slash key on the same key as the question mark."

      "Okay
  • Long answer: GUI's have been overemphasized because for too long computers used CLI's and left the novice user an expert interface and nothing else. A really good GUI though will show the user keyboard shortcuts as they use the GUI more and more, especially for common functions. One way that seems to be dying off - which isn't good - is that many apps (usually Microsoft's) would have the keyboard shortcut for a command right in the menu. It did clutter the menu, but there ought to be still some way of makin
    • Already over ten years ago, Microsoft had it in their GUI guidelines that every program should be tested without a mosue. Just unplug the mouse and see if you can use the program. This is still exceptionally good advice, and almost never heeded.

      For some programs, such as Visio and Photoshop, not using a mouse or some other pointing device is pretty pointless. But I can't think of *any* administrative system that should require a mouse.

      What is truly sad is that just when MS started to get a hang of this

  • 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
  • There are a few considerations here:

    1. How many shortcuts would need to be remembered to work efficiently.
    2. How long will an average user stay at this job before moving on.
    3. How smart is the typical user.
    4. Should the interface be localized/internationalized?
    5. How much will an average user use the interface in an average week?
    6. Can every feature in the interface have a reasonable keyboard shortcut?

    There's probably a lot more.
  • CLI is all very well if your doing something which you have done before, however for learning a new task a GUI is MUCH better. A typical GUI can display orders of magnitude more information that a terminal (or DOS) window. Additionaly a good GUI will organise the information spacially in order to group similar functions / option. With CLI all you have to rely on is cryptic man pages. Now I agree that for some tasks CLI is much more efficient than using a GUI but it does presume quite a lot of task specific
    • "Plus there are some things that you just plain cant do in a CLI, sound, photoediting, music, word processing, designing presentations, spreadsheeting the list goes on"

      Sound? And why not? Lets try it: "sox input.au pitch 10"

      Photoediting? And why not? Lets try it: "pnmhisteq photo.pnm"

      Designing presentations? And why not? Lets try it: "include header; bullet list; item 1; item 2; item 3; end bullet list; wait 5 seconds; comb transition" (made up the syntax -- I use troff with pic, and output to pdf).

      Spreadsh
  • The short answer: yes. EMACS users have known this forever: once you get through the learning curve --- I've been using EMACS for close to 25 years, I've begun to get it --- it's much more convenient to use C-X C-f twiddle tab key key tab than to have to open and browse and so forth. Spotlight on the Mac begins to make up for it; increasingly I'll just jump to the Spotlight window and type enough to identify a file, not even bother with the pathname.

    I used to consult for Sabre; they've got an airline res
    • I've had a similar experience with dealing with pine and outlook, it is much faster saving a message to a folder with pine even though I'm a terrible typist.

      A lot of the young-uns around here would do well to look back at the CLI vs GUI debate that took place around the introduction of the Mac.

  • Both! (Score:2)

    by samael ( 12612 )
    I build GUIs at work to replace/front-end the mainframe apps we use. They _all_ have short-cut keys out the wazoo, because they increase speed. So you can_ use the mouse to move from place to place, but if you want to learn the speedier way, it's there for you.

  • I don't know what else to say other than "Duh"

    Isn't there some way you can incorporate short-cut keys into a web page to reintroduce the labor saving options? I know TAB works most of the time, but I suspect a lot of DHTML pages have paid no attention to the path your cursor takes when you TAB, but then textmessage fields are problematic.

    Using the mouse is a pain. I contributes significantly to CTS in every work environment I've been in

  • ... clicking in the xterm you want to type in

        -- Anonymous internet post I happen to have seen today but cannot now find fot the life of me.

    I happen to agree with this... but then again I use vi/bash/totalcmd under windows.

    With the exception of Games... of course. ;)
  • From ticket agents to bank tellers, many are adopting slick UI and flat panel LCD's in place of large black and green CRT terminals with old legacy applications running on them.

    The biggest mistake being made is to force those users to require using a mouse instead of preserving the quick key input from the previous software.

    In many cases, a mouse just doesn't make sense to use. Often the area these terminals were original installed lack the space to place a mouse effectively, forcing employees to adopt com
  • This link needs to be in this discussion somewhere In the Beginning was the Command Line [cryptonomicon.com] (It was written before Stephenson went insane writing the Baroque Cycle, so it shouldnt take your more than a week to read)

    The AskSlashdot question leads me to believe that the users are doing a lot of data entry. I have experienced similar feedback when migrating users from one system to a newer system with 'bling'.

    The thing one has to look at is not the time to do one thing but one task. It is a big difference.

  • Any GUI that cannot be used with the keyboard alone is defective.
  • If it's AS400 powered then it's probably not DOS based. I think the article submitter meant text-based (console-based, terminal emulator-based, 3270-based, but not DOS based!)

    Okay, maybe I'm being pedantic - I just have this thing about everything non-gui being called DOS.
  • I'm partial to all things Unix'y, so I'm always at the command line and get plenty of work done.

    But you've answered your own question:

    The people in the department that don't take time to learn the tools at as deep a level as you have, aren't as productive.

    The computer's just a tool. Figuring out how to do your work more efficiently is a personal challenge we all face.

    Really astute folks in your department that see you going faster than they can who also have a personal interest in bettering themselves will

Slashdot Top Deals

Cobol programmers are down in the dumps.

Close