Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!lll-winken!lll-ncis!helios.ee.lbl.gov!pasteur!ames!hc!lanl!cmcl2!adm!smoke!gwyn
From: gwyn@smoke.BRL.MIL (Doug Gwyn )
Newsgroups: comp.unix.wizards
Subject: Re: modern terminals
Message-ID: <9316@smoke.BRL.MIL>
Date: 8 Jan 89 14:32:24 GMT
References: <19@xenlink.UUCP> <7328@chinet.chi.il.us> <144@bms-at.UUCP> <11072@ulysses.homer.nj.att.com> <1000@vsi.COM>
Reply-To: gwyn@brl.arpa (Doug Gwyn (VLD/VMB) <gwyn>)
Organization: Ballistic Research Lab (BRL), APG, MD.
Lines: 48

In article <1000@vsi.COM> friedl@vsi.COM (Stephen J. Friedl) writes:
>It's time for a reality break.  You guys need to venture out of
>your labs and see how The Real World(tm) operates for a change.

I've got news for you:  We're part of the Real World too.
Many of the people we work with are "average Joes", not
computer whizzes.

>I don't agree, however, with the implication that character
>terminals are generally obsolete: I say you people are either
>naive or elitist (or both).

The discussion was originally on the need for standardizing
"dumb CRT" interfaces, e.g. curses.  Even the spiffiest
terminals are used primarily with text interfaces.  But
there are efficient ways to do this and klutzy ones.

>-- they simply don't look at the screen.
>... a line-oriented printf/fgets loop because the customer insisted
>that anything more was overkill.

Obviously then they don't need a curses-oriented interface
either.

>Does anybody out there seriously think that a Blit at the counter
>of a Dept of Motor Vehicles clerk would make him/her any more
>productive?  *THREE TIMES* more productive?  Gee, if we gave them
>a *Sun* then there would be no more lines, right?

If these clerks had systems that fully exploited spiffy interfaces,
they could well be considerably more productive.  Lots could be
done to improve their use of computing resources even with the
hardware they now have, but if one is going to invest effort in
improving an application, it is probably better spent in a direction
with a future to it than on squeezing the mnost out of archaic
technology.

People once asked the same questions about ANY use of computers;
perhaps you're too young to remember that.  Initially there was
quite a lot of evidence that "computerization" didn't help
productivity, but the reasons for that have vanished in most
instances, and it's often hard to appreciate the productivity
inherent in such mundane applications as computerized check-out
counters.  The ability to have several things simultaneously
under one's control and to interrelate them, including routing
information between them, is a power that could obviously help
"average Joes" do their jobs better.  The challenge for US is to
find ways to make that power accessible to them.