Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!lll-winken!lll-lcc!pyramid!hplabs!hplabsz!taylor
From: inc@tc.FLUKE.COM (Gary Benson)
Newsgroups: comp.society
Subject: Re: Paper versus Computer Monitors
Message-ID: <1851@hplabsz.HPL.HP.COM>
Date: 6 Apr 88 23:09:00 GMT
Sender: taylor@hplabsz.HPL.HP.COM
Organization: John Fluke Mfg. Co., Inc., Everett, WA
Lines: 24
Approved: taylor@hplabs

The question asking why people seem to prefer editing on paper rather
than on a terminal screen has been kicking around a long time.  One of
the best theories I've heard states that the editing task in and of
itself requires the editor to establish a feel for context.  By
presenting information a screenful at a time, it is difficult to get a
good feel for where you are in a document.  In addition, the
establishment of context aids the editor who must sometimes cross-check,
for example, if I'm at page 75 in a 200 page manual and I notice an
error, I may want to go back to see if there are other occurrences.
It's easy with paper, less so on a screen.  Or I may want to put my
finger on a page for ready reference because I know that I'll need to
refer to a particular piece of information later on, and rather than
searching, I'll just leave my finger there.  Even very clever interfaces
cannot match the simplicity of laying a finger between two pieces of
paper!

At one time I was a strong proponent of the "paperless" office, but
arguments like these and my own experience have shown me that such a
thing is probably unrealistic.  In fact, I predict that computer screens
will always be second choice over paper for many users besides editors.
For example, technicians will probably always prefer the paper service
manual, cooks their cookbooks and engineers their CRC Standard Math
Tables.

Gary Benson