From: furballs@sequent.com (Paul Penrod)
Newsgroups: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Macintosh bigots
Date: 24 Nov 92 00:24:54 GMT
Article-I.D.: sequent.1992Nov24.002454.3412
Organization: Sequent Computer Systems Inc.

In article <5d317zg@rpi.edu> johnsd2@lib101.its.rpi.edu.its1 writes:
>In article @lynx.unm.edu, (Tim Keitt) writes:
>>In article <-921p5a@rpi.edu> johnsd2@jec312.its.rpi.edu.its1 (Daniel Norman Johnson) writes:
>
>>The bigger issue is that the PC interface is being take hostage 
>>by a headlong rush to eliminate any effort on the part of the 
>>user. The need to please reviewers who spend a few hours or 
>>days with a program (at best) is paramount.
>
>> I recently read 
>>that despite the fact that millions of computers have been sold 
>>in the US, there has been no measurable gain in productivity.
>
>I've heard this too. It may be true, but it makes me wonder how
>they measure productivity. (oh no, I hear you scream, he's
>going on about measurement again! not that!)
>

It's true in many instances. Case in point. One of the client
companies I do work for on occasion has stopped migrating it's
users to Windows and Macs, for the simple reason that productivity
dropped instead of going up, and the invested dollars were not
being returned by the switch in computing environments.

The secretaries all knew WordPerfect (BLECH!) for DOS, and Word
5.0+. They were comfortable with them and really didn't care to see
what the document looked like until it hit the printer; thats what
templates are for, and there is not suffcient time during the day
to make it pretty.

The engineers played all day with their new toys, instead of
getting work done. I would hear echoing in the hallway more often
than not "Hey, <whomever>, come here. Guess what this thing does?"
all day long. This is not real work.

DOS for all it's banality provides a sparse environment that allows
quite a bit of real work to get done. The one major drawback is the
lack of multi-tasking. VI is the same thing. It aint pretty but you
cant beat it for getting work done on a machine. I use BRIEF for
the same reason. Forget the mouse and the pretties. I want to reel
code onto the disk as fast my fingers can get it into the keyboard.

Now, as to measurements. This is subjective but it demonstrates the
pervasivness of non-productivity that was resulting. Several
secretaries were monitored over a 30 day period to find out how
much paper work went through their DOS systems on the avergage and
then recorded to reflect the level of activity from the people
generating the paper requests. This gave them a base line to work
with.

Next, they were upgraded to Macs or Windows, their choice, and then
evaluated 90 days after the systems went in, to allow for learning
curves, as well as instruction that was given to help them learn
the WP packages chosen for use. In this case it was MS-WORD for
both the Mac and Windows.

After another 30 day measurement of paper output, adjusted for the
level of activity of the people generating the requests, the output
was as much as 20% lower overall. Now what was more disturbing, was
that the level of request activity was 17% higher than the first
evaluation, so with the unadjusted activity level, the productivity
looked even worse.

The secretaries were interviewed by management to determine what
the problem was, and almost all of them, with 2 exceptions wanted
their DOS systems back. They complained of TOO MANY features to
keep track of, and they never used them. They wanted something
SIMPLE, not user friendly. Most of them played constantly with
thier displays trying to change things to fit their mood. Under
DOS, they were happy when told, they could only have White on Blue.
It meant there was one less trivial detail to worry about.

The conclusion that was reached was that even though the
secretaries were given "superior tools" as compared to what they
had, they became less productive because they became more
distracted with the environment. They wasted time, and time is
money.

>> I 
>>think this is because most users don't invest the time to learn 
>>their machines and software.
>
>I disagree; I think it is because they DO invest said time; they must,
>if they wish to use their computers. This is true for Macs
>as well (tho not as much so, Imho) These people DO NOT want to learn
>how to use a computer; they want to get something down with it with
>the minimal effort. They should not need to "learn their machines and
>software". So far the best we can do for them is to make it easier
>to learn their machines, and make sure there is as little as possible
>to learn. This is what the Mac tries to do, and what Windows tries to
>do. (but what vi doesn't try to do :) )
>
>> I see people doing repetitive 
>>tasks manually all the time, when if they'd just crack a manual 
>>and learn a few programming concepts they'd save tremendous 
>>amounts of time.
>

Generally, people are lazy. They always try to do the minimum to
get by, and companies like Apple and Microsoft are too busy tring
to save people from themselves with their "user friendly" approach
to every task on the machine of choice.

Features, when warranted are a very nice addtional, and sometimes
mandatory, but when it get's to be an engineer's orgy, thats when
the product has lost the battle.

-- 
--------------------------------------------------------------------
            Bureaucracy: noun, plural - Bureaucracies.
         The process of turning energy into solid waste.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Newsgroups: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy