From: fj05+@andrew.cmu.edu (Faisal Nameer Jawdat)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: When is a CLI faster than a GUI?
Date: 27 Sep 92 14:12:10 GMT
Article-I.D.: andrew.8elX6ue00VRBA9iL5w
	<gbhz=jl@rpi.edu>
Organization: Sophomore, Physics, Carnegie Mellon, Pittsburgh, PA

johnsd2@jec324.its.rpi.edu (Daniel Norman Johnson) writes:
> But what if you dont REMEMBER the command-keys to hit?

In order for someone who is used to the program to forget what command
keys to hit, the command must be of sufficient dissuse and complexity
that it would also take some time to find the command in the
appropriate menu or more likely, sub menu, assuming it's not on some
dialog box you have to bring up, or some such thing...

> Indeed, there are supposedly studies that show that mousing is faster
> than command-keys because you have to remember stuff to use
> command keys. You just don't remember thinking about it. I expect
> you've heard of that, but I doubt you believe a word of it. :)

I have yet to see one of these famous studies - I saw someone mention
that Apple had done studies showing that mousing was faster than
typing, and then this person hypothesized that the reason was the
active process/memory recal bit, and suddenly everyone's taking as
gospel the fact that it is easier to double click on my hard drive,
double click on the games folder, double click on the tetris like
games folder, double click on the colour tetris folder, and double
click on the colour tetris folder than it is to type the following
keys (which is what i would have to type if I were using tcsh on my
mac):
a c [tab] g [tab] t e [tab] c o [tab] t e [tab] [enter]
which translates to the following
the tab does file matching
i do similar things on my unix account all the time - even if the
shell hasn't caught up to me it buffers my typing so that when its
done it executes
with the mac i have to wait for each folder to open, which takes time
i just did the example on the mac and a similar example in a shell to
my unix account
mac: 17 seconds
unix: 3 seconds to type, 4 seconds wait for the shell to run through
the file completion and buffer and then execute the instructions, but
meanwhile i was doing something else

somebody please show me where these alleged studies are, and then i
will be more likely to believe them
if not i may force you all to take our competing cognitive processes
course here - you'll love it

> |>  More nested menu choices amplify this
> |> difference.
> 
> This is true. Heirarchial menus are very slow. A good
> reason not to use them, imho. But sometimes they are necessary.

but unless your menus are huge and unorganized, you need heiracchial
menu's or you have a rather limited scope of options

> |> Programs that do not offer keystroke alternatives are assuming that
> |> their users are either too lazy to get used to a keyboard or don't
> |> care if it takes longer to perform an operation with the mouse.
> 
> Or think it doesn't. Most provice keyboard equivalents for frequent
> operations, but not for uncommon ones. After all, what good
> is a keyboard equivalent if you cant remember it?

which is assuming too little of the user, i postulate...
Look at the word processor Nisus for the mac.  It lets you set
keyboard shortcuts for menu items - thus it makes the interface work
for you, rather than forcing you to work to its interface - I use
Nisus, and not a lot, but I type my papers and my stories on it, and
do a lot of text formatting of things I find on the internet.  Of
their command key equivalent i use about 20, and I use another 20 I
made myself
maybe I just have a better memory than the rest of you..

the best of both worlds is a GUI that lets you use CLI's and GAI's all
at once - you can't do that on a straight CLI - this is the advantage
of the NeXT, os/2, Xwindows, etc.

(GIA: Graphically Interactive Application)