Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!sdd.hp.com!caen!sol.ctr.columbia.edu!cunixf.cc.columbia.edu!cunixa.cc.columbia.edu!mig
From: mig@cunixa.cc.columbia.edu (Meir I Green)
Newsgroups: comp.human-factors
Subject: Re: Yucky ATM interfaces (WAS Re: Touchscreens)
Message-ID: <1991Jun20.215350.18623@cunixf.cc.columbia.edu>
Date: 20 Jun 91 21:53:50 GMT
References: <1991Jun19.233836.19040@ohmeda.com> <1991Jun20.042048.2749@Think.COM> <1991Jun20.162302.4311@cs.umn.edu>
Sender: usenet@cunixf.cc.columbia.edu (The Network News)
Reply-To: mig@cunixa.cc.columbia.edu (Meir I Green)
Organization: Columbia University
Lines: 31
Nntp-Posting-Host: cunixa.cc.columbia.edu

In article <1991Jun20.162302.4311@cs.umn.edu> brsmith@cs.umn.edu (Brian R. Smith) writes:
>Probably because at SOME financial institutions (I.E. My old credit
>onion) a "transaction" means a $0.75 charge.  Doesn't matter what
>transaction.  You wouldn't want to imply that getting a balance was
>not a transaction (I.E. free).

It seems to me that there is no reason to require so many screens.  Wouldn't it
be simpler to make the first or last option be QUIT/END and include this in 1
complete menu?  The approach of multiple screens is like playing animal with
only a few entries.  One menu is more appropriate than nested menus.  The user
ends up having to decide more than with the integrated menu alone.

ie:

DONE, Return my card.

Cash withdrawal

Deposit

Then, if the user presses the first button, the ATM could ask if he would like
the balance printed on the receipt (my thought is this is not a good idea, 
anyway).

For 2nd and third, just ask the amounts...
Then say ok, and return to the main menu.

* * * * * *  ====================== Meir Green
 * * * * * * ====================== (Internet) mig@cunixb.cc.columbia.edu
* * * * * *  ====================== meir@msb.com  mig@asteroids.cs.columbia.edu
 * * * * * * ====================== (Amateur Radio) N2JPG