Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!bonnie.concordia.ca!thunder.mcrcim.mcgill.edu!snorkelwacker.mit.edu!think.com!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!cis.ohio-state.edu!ucbvax!ucsd!dog.ee.lbl.gov!csa3.lbl.gov!jtchew
From: jtchew@csa3.lbl.gov (JOSEPH T CHEW)
Newsgroups: comp.human-factors
Subject: Re: Good ATM interface (WAS Re: Yucky ATM interfaces (WAS Re: Touchscreens)
Summary: Some high-level constraints on ATM interfaces
Message-ID: <14697@dog.ee.lbl.gov>
Date: 29 Jun 91 16:31:09 GMT
References: <2073@manta.NOSC.MIL> <27181@ttidca.TTI.COM>
Reply-To: jtchew@csa3.lbl.gov
Organization: Lawrence Berkeley Laboratory - Berkeley, CA, USA
Lines: 24
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.3-4
X-Local-Date: Wed, 26 Jun 91 08:53:28 PDT

A few random constraints:

*  Uniformity.  ATMs are increasingly tied together by multibank,
   interstate networks.  It is desirable not only to offer some
   uniformity, but also to avoid sticking in the fork of "enhancements"
   and twirling thousands of lines of code into spaghetti.

   There are also mechanical compatibility issues.  If they all look
   more or less alike they're cheaper.

*  User skills.  Anybody bright enough to walk around unescorted and
   open a bank account might try to use an ATM.  Hence the emphasis
   on function buttons and prompts rather than ASCII input and menus.

*  Mechanical issues.  These machines take a beating.  At any given
   bogey value of cost, that limits how much you can offer and the
   technology with which you can implement it.

*  Psychology.  People are suspicious and conservative about money
   and want reassurance that the machine in the wall is doing 
   something familiar with it.

--Joe
"Just another personal opinion from the People's Republic of Berkeley"