ðòïåëôù 


  áòèé÷ 


Apache-Talk @lexa.ru 

Inet-Admins @info.east.ru 

Filmscanners @halftone.co.uk 

Security-alerts @yandex-team.ru 

nginx-ru @sysoev.ru 

  óôáôøé 


  ðåòóïîáìøîïå 


  ðòïçòáííù 



ðéûéôå
ðéóøíá












     áòèé÷ :: Filmscanners
Filmscanners mailing list archive (filmscanners@halftone.co.uk)

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: filmscanners: Need feedback on VueScan Idea



Mike Kersenbrock wrote:

> Jim Snyder wrote:
> >
> > But, a properly designed program usually uses speed keys for the buttons
> > anyway, and location is not a concern. I have yet to meet many users that
> > don't recohgnize the efficiencies picked up by shortcuts, aliases, and speed
> > keys. Even the function keys can be programmed to handle the tabs.
>
> You're suggesting to get rid of the menus and buttons inasmuch as their
> design doesn't matter and just have shortcuts, aliases, and speed keys?

Not at all. I am suggesting that having buttons located at the bottom of the
screen is not a handicap to workers who use speed keys, aliases, and shortcuts
for efficiency. Since everybody uses software differently, redundancy is a good
thing (except for customer support). Since someone 'mousing around' is not using
the most efficient way to do things, the minor inconvenience of buttons being
across the screen from tabs is probably not even noticed. Think of Ed's audience
as being a pyramid. Most users are not that skilled and are the base of the
pyramid. The next band of power users is a smaller group, and is topped by a 
tiny
group of gurus who use every efficiency they can get. That broad base of users
with less than stellar skills will use the tabs and buttons regardless of where
they are on the screen. The middle band may use a mixture of methods, and are
likely to be irritated by little things. The top layer of gurus will once again
not notice, because they are using the most efficient way supplied.

Jim Snyder




 




Copyright © Lexa Software, 1996-2009.