Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!csd4.milw.wisc.edu!dogie.macc.wisc.edu!indri!lll-winken!uunet!mcvax!ukc!acorn!moncam!harry
From: harry@moncam.co.uk (Jangling Neck Nipper)
Newsgroups: comp.society.futures
Subject: Re: Electronic Banking
Summary: Foraging
Message-ID: <184@marvin.moncam.co.uk>
Date: 8 May 89 17:28:55 GMT
References: <4160@crash.cts.com>
Organization: Monotype ADG, Cambridge, UK
Lines: 28

In article <4160@crash.cts.com>, ray@pnet01.cts.com (R. Andrew Rathbone) writes:

> But when foraging through a newspaper, haven't you found articles and subjects
> of interest by accident? Haven't you ever started to read something you'd

YES!!! Format is VERY important for browsing or foraging.  It's not easy when
all you have is a simple terminal and a keyboard, simply because foraging
involves scanning lots of info and then picking up (maybe by chance) things
of interest, and a simple terminal just *won't* do.  A graphics display will
be as good as a newspaper if it can be made to be easily browsed; this means
having a reasonable expanse of information with different typefaces &c. &c.
I would also prefer not getting a headache looking at a screen (I get headaches
reading `news' a lot, while I *never* get them reading newspapers, but I
accept that this may simply be what I'm used to).

Are these just personal gripes? After all, newspaper and book formats have
changed markedly over the years.  Who out there prefers a simple terminal
to a newspaper?

Of course, the ideal marriage is the hires screen, 'coz the data can than
be scanned by eye *and* some suitable key words.

Another point is, not everybody browses, and would find key words preferable.
-- 
  ,---.'\ 
 (  /@ )/    Nothing is true.        
   /( _/  )  Everything is permitted.
   \,`---'