From: bcoleman@hayes.com (Bill Coleman)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: More Defense of CLI (there, I changed the subject ... )
Date: 13 Oct 92 14:18:58 EDT
Organization: Hayes Microcomputer Products, Norcross, GA

In article <1992Oct12.221502.12684@nwnexus.WA.COM>, kanefsky@halcyon.com (Steve Kanefsky) writes:

[ Steve, while I appreciate your apparent want for completeness, it isn't 
  necessary to quote the entire article to make a comment on one part of it ]

>>The problem with this comparison is you are dwelling on only the MECHANICS of
>>entering or selecting the command. You've not addressed the COGNITIVE part
>>of the operation. 
>>
>>With the keyboard, you have to think of where the menu is, what it is called,
>>recall the path to that item, recall (or synthesize) the shortcut, and then
>>type.
>>
>>With the mouse, you have to think of where the menu is, then you REACH OUT
>>AND GRAB IT. There's almost no cognitive load.
> 
> This is utter nonsense.  

It is not.

> They keyboard is, in fact, easier to reach out
> and grab than a menu on the screen, because you are literally
> reaching out and grabbing it, rather than going through the mouse 

Not true.

A two-year old can use a mouse. You don't need to even spell or understand
what letters are to use a mouse. All you have to do is move it like you move
it on the screen. Simple.

> (where you might have to pick the mouse up if you run out of room on your 
> mouse pad, etc.)  

This is a trivial operation that is easily learned. 

> Note that anyone can press a key on a keyboard with no practice, but it 
> takes some practice to use a mouse.  

This completely fallacious. What are you measuring here? You can teach someone
to meaninglessly press a key, versus using a mouse proficiently? 

How about we compare the amount of time it takes to become proficient with 
either system. It takes months of practice to become a proficient typist.
It takes weeks merely to learn where all the keys are. You can learn to mouse
in a few minutes, and become completely proficient within a few weeks!

> If I learn to associate "X" with cut and "C" with copy 
> I can reach out to the keyboard and grab the command I want in 
> practically no time.  

Except that under Windows, the association of "X" with Cut and "C" with Copy
doesn't exist. Cut could be Ctrl-X or it could be Shift-Del, or it could
be ALT-ET (except this doesn't work in all cases). This inconsistancy
inhibits learning, so you never acheive the level of association necessary
to beat out the mouse.

> In addition to the extra cognitive effort of manipulating the mouse 

The cognitive effort is not different than that required to reach out and
grab a coffee cup. You can do this without thinking. It is a low-level 
operation that takes place with little mental effort.

> you have to remember what menu the command is in 

No you don't. You don't have to remember at all. All you have to do is
RECOGNISE. Humans are terrible at remembering things. They are excellent at
recognising things. 

> and you may have to scan all the items in the menu carefully for the 
> command you want 

This is true only for the first few times you use a new product. We're 
speaking of reasonably proficient users, who are familiar with the product
(or similar products). 

The beauty of the Macintosh is that you DON'T have to root around to find
the "Copy" menu item, because it is ALWAYS under the Edit menu. And the
Edit menus is ALWAYS in the same place. Consistancy.

> (especially in programs that change the menu structure according to context).

I have yet to see a Macintosh program that changes the location of Copy or
the position of the Edit and File menus. If you can find one, I submit that
the authors of these programs should be shot.

> Furthermore, you can pipeline or parallelize keyboard commands with
> mouse movements.  Suppose you have a dialog box on the screen with
> several fields, and you want to paste a value into each field.  While
> I'm mousing from field to field I can use the keyboard shortcut to paste
> into each field.  

Good point. I do this often. If I had to use the keyboard for all operations,
I'd be quite a bit slower.

> Your example of using keyboard commands to navigate through menus is
> almost guaranteed to be worse than mousing because it imposes many of
> the disadvantages of mousing.  

It wasn't my example. It was the example of these rabid Windows users who
appear to infest comp.sys.mac.advocacy. They seem to be of the opinion that
this menu navigation is actually faster and easier than using the mouse.

> You might as well insist that I use easy access to control the mouse 
> pointer from the keyboard.  And then I can insist that you test the speed 
> of the mouse-based interface by typing command lines with the Keycaps DA.

This is obviously an ad hominem argument by taking a rational suggestion
to its irrational extreme. I suggested no such thing. 

>>Until the CLI camp can come up with results from such experiements, we must
>>conclude that using the mouse (and a visual interface) is faster than using
>>a CLI. End of debate.
> 
> OK, here is my experiment:
> 
> Define a function K(X,Y) as the time it takes person X to perform task Y
> on the keyboard.
> 
> Define another function M(X,Y) as the time it takes person X to perform
> task Y on the mouse.
> 
> Let X be me and let Y be the task of copying a line of text in Microsoft
> Word 5.0, then pasting 10 times.

I submit that Y is too trivial a task, and one that is selected to enhance
the results from the keyboard. Why did you paste 10 times? Why not paste
just once? 

Further, I don't believe your experiment included the actual SELECTION
process. You'd need to try a variety of selection sizes, including selections
that aren't visible from the screen.

A better test would be to have users find a particular paragraph within a
text, select it, cut it and replace it at a different point in the text.
This would cover all the basic skills, and remove this rubbish of pasting
10 times.

> You seem to claim that M(X,Y) < K(X,Y) for all X, Y.  I have just proven
> you wrong.

For the specific, limited case of a single Y, perhaps so. But for the generic
case of all computer tasks Y, not at all. You've shown me nothing. (Except
ways to improve your tests)

-- 
Bill Coleman, AA4LR                ! CIS: 76067,2327    AppleLink: D1958
Principal Software Engineer        ! Packet Radio: AA4LR @ W4QO
Hayes Microcomputer Products, Inc. ! UUCP: uunet!hayes!bcoleman
POB 105203 Atlanta, GA 30348 USA   ! Internet: bcoleman%hayes@uunet.uu.net
Disclaimer: "My employer doesn't pay me to have opinions."
Quote: "The same light shines on vineyards that makes deserts." -Steve Hackett.

Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.advocacy