Does your GUI design, ignore the KeyBoard?

I am a typist. In 1967 I could do 97 wmp on an electric typewriter.

Having to move your hands from the home position, drastically reduces
your entry speed.

Another real life story: (RLS Circa 1984)
Like I say, I was fast, maybe the fastest programmer/typist ever.
I was new to the job. In those days we coded the program on
paper then entered it in a common area where there were 8 or 10
terminals. I just happened to sit near the fastest programmer they
had (Valerie K.) As soon as I started entering my program. All the
others quit typing. They knew there was a race going on. At the
start it was very close. Then I switched my tactics for more speed.
The language was Basic. It had lots of Brackets (), Percent Signs %,
Dollar Signs $ and Equal Signs =. I would type LL for left bracket (
RR for right bracket ). PP for %, DD for $ etc.. you get the idea.
I blew Valerie away. Way less Shift and reach for me. Then I did a
quick search and replace (EE to =) (DD to $)... I had never done that
type of entry before or since. I wanted to win and did.   
 
Please please when developing software, don't ignore those of us that
can type. It doesn't have to take anything away from your GUI.

 

 

It's a good point and one that's often overlooked.

I tend to be a mouser, rather than a typer, so I've had to train myself to take account of good keyboard design, especially as I tend to write business applications where a large number of users are secretaries/receptionists who are trained typists.

I've also trained myself to enter the accessability details for on-screen controls, too. It's also an area that get ignored too much.


Herbie

Microsoft has historically been pretty good at making suire programs are keyboard accessible.  I really like what they've done with the new office--  they make the keyboard shortcuts discoverable in a very effective way, IMO.

thumbtacks wrote:



SpectateSwamp wrote: I am a typist. In 1967 I could do 97 wmp on an electric typewriter.

How fast were you on a manual typewriter?

On manual typewriters I was probably 10 wmp slower. The machine
was an Underwood with the strike heads. Shortly after that they
came out with the print ball head. That increased the speed by
another 10% or so.

Siencifically proven: accessing actions by keyboard is 3 times faster than by mouse. It's not about typing some text.

Just compare time of pressing "Alt+F4" and time of precising and pointing small stupid cross in the windows's upper right corner.

Yes, it requires some training but it worth.

PS: I hate mouse personally in work, only in games or internet browsing.

In order for software to attain the Microsoft compatible Logo, the GUI must be operable without any mouse. I'd be shocked if this wasn't still a criterion.

Operating a computer, on the other hand, is not using a typewriter (outside of word processing). Word processors are not what I consider typical software programs.

Using a mouse became the norm after the UI became a GUI, and for most applications and users, is the default expected behaviour. This tendency has, in fact, resulted in many applications that don't operate without a mouse. I've been amazed over the past 15 years when program managers suggest not to waste time providing keyboard shortcuts; yes, they sometimes do. Notice, for example, how XP hides the underscores until one actually uses them, or until goes into settings to make them always show. I even discovered one programmer actually spent two weeks fumbling around Win32API looking for a way to make shortcut underscores appear - not knowing the XP caveat.

I'm not an insanely fast typist, but I do remember around 1990 watching my wife's assistant typing over 100 wpm on an electric typewriter. It sounded like shaking a coffee can half filled with marbles; jaw-dropping.

BlackTiger wrote:

Siencifically proven: accessing actions by keyboard is 3 times faster than by mouse. It's not about typing some text.

Just compare time of pressing "Alt+F4" and time of precising and pointing small stupid cross in the windows's upper right corner.

Yes, it requires some training but it worth.

PS: I hate mouse personally in work, only in games or internet browsing.

 

I worked on a keypunch verify system in 1974. The keypunch
girls forced us to do an inset keypad switch when entering
numeric fields.  There was no way they wanted to use the
numeric keypad.

For me the function keys might just as well be hanging from the wall
you have to move your hands from the home position. Entering
JJ or some such sequence is far faster than any set of Ctrl / Alt / Fn
keys.

You can fiddle with code to increase execution speed but the
real gains are in the application interface.
 

JohnAskew wrote:



In order for software to attain the Microsoft compatible Logo, the GUI must be operable without any mouse. I'd be shocked if this wasn't still a criterion.

Operating a computer, on the other hand, is not using a typewriter (outside of word processing). Word processors are not what I consider typical software programs.

Using a mouse became the norm after the UI became a GUI, and for most applications and users, is the default expected behaviour. This tendency has, in fact, resulted in many applications that don't operate without a mouse. I've been amazed over the past 15 years when program managers suggest not to waste time providing keyboard shortcuts; yes, they sometimes do. Notice, for example, how XP hides the underscores until one actually uses them, or until goes into settings to make them always show. I even discovered one programmer actually spent two weeks fumbling around Win32API looking for a way to make shortcut underscores appear - not knowing the XP caveat.

I'm not an insanely fast typist, but I do remember around 1990 watching my wife's assistant typing over 100 wpm on an electric typewriter. It sounded like shaking a coffee can half filled with marbles; jaw-dropping.

Still lots more to do with the keyboard. How about iii instead of the
up arrow jjj instead of the left arrow etc etc. If those options were
there I know I'd use them.

Over 100 is fast. They would take 10 words off per error during
testing.

thumbtacks wrote:


Okay...I remember growing up with a Royal manual typewriter (with the little metal hammers for each letter). If you hit two characters at the same time, the hammers would get stuck to each other.

I would imagine nowadays keyboards allow people to type much faster.

Then again, it was fun once in a while to smash a bunch of keys at once and open up the top to see the big ol' clusterf*ck of metal hammers stuck together.

Every time they jammed, you had to reach up and pull them back.
The carriage return was also a slowing factor. In a room of 50
 people typeing at full speed, pretty noisy and impressive.

With electronics and my typing tricks, those speeds could be almost
double.

 
If you wanted to see real speed, it was those keypunch/verify ladies.
their right was dancing during numerics and with text there were two
hands pounding the keyboard. NO carriage returns, no stuck keys. Just
raw speed. You younger people haven't seen anything like it.

I was reminded how fast a keyboard can be as I was navigating Media Center in Vista.  They have done a really good job with it.

Larsenal wrote:

I was reminded how fast a keyboard can be as I was navigating Media Center in Vista.  They have done a really good job with it.

Good going Vista group.
Real application speed happens at the keyboard.

I always make sure at least that the tab order is right on all my forms, that everyone that should have a mnemonic has one (and that I have no duplicates), that the acceptbutton and cancelbutton are set up correctly, and that if I have menus, there are appropriate shortcut keys available.

I used to work for Unit4, who make financing applications for accountants (e.g. Multivers, Omnivers). Accountants in particular want to be able to do data entry without touching the mouse, so it was a big focus for us.

BlackTiger wrote:


PS: I hate mouse personally in work, only in games or internet browsing.

I try to minimise the use of the mouse in the use of the computer. I often use Alt+F4, and Alt+Tab; also, I have often browsed the internet with only the keyboard, although it is terribly slow as I have to do: "F6, Type URL, Wait to load, Tab, Tab, Tab, Tab, etc.".

Angus Higgins

thumbtacks wrote:

I'm curious...did your typing teacher force you to type with the lights off? Or with a piece of paper over the keys? I remember hearing about a teacher that did that once so he could see who was cheating by looking down at the keys or not.

In my day, they just blew the candles out.

thumbtacks wrote:

Hey, now that would be a worthy Sandbox project...if somebody came up with a manual typewriter emulator for the PC. Have it complete with a ding when you hit enter, and make a ticking sound effect everything you hit a key. If you hit two keys simultaneously it should seize up.

Say, does anybody know of the function that could control the CD tray? Like to make it eject? Is there a way to make it close the drawer programatically?

Edit: http://www.codeproject.com/system/eject_cdrom.asp

That could be fun...  I don't have access to a manual typewriter to get the sounds though.

You can programatically eject the CD on all systems, and close it on desktops.  You can't close a laptop-type drive (the spring-loaded ones) for obvious reasons.

thumbtacks wrote:

I'm curious...did your typing teacher force you to type with the lights off? Or with a piece of paper over the keys? I remember hearing about a teacher that did that once so he could see who was cheating by looking down at the keys or not.

Hmmm, you just sent me down memory lane. I had some strange typing teachers. One was this crazy old woman who insisted that you followed her rules for typing during class. One of the stupid ones was that she insisted that your fingers all return to home row between every letter. Interestingly enough, her typing speed probably wasn't more than 20-30 WPM, while most of the class could easily outpace her (and get in trouble for not following the rules).

The other typing teacher that I had was also one of the sports coaches (I dunno, I think it was that one with the ball). He didn't care what we did as long as we finished the exercises we were assigned. In fact, he had installed Doom and Doom II on all of the computers for our enjoyment after we had finished our exercises. Being unable to convince any of the faculty that I shouldn't have to take the class, I finished the exercises for the quarter in a couple of days and played doom and read the rest of the 8 weeks 3 days that the class lasted.

SpectateSwamp wrote:


...

First off- props to your typing skills.

Although, try to follow Alan Cooper's design principle: Always Design for the Perpetual Intermediate. You're the rare exception: being able to type like that. Most people cannot. And, if I have a choice between adding some heavily requested (or moderately requested) features over making my GUIs completely keyboard sensitive, I'll pass on the keyboard: it just doesn't make sense, and wastes my client's money and time.

That being said, I don't make them unfriendly either: I keep tab order available. I try to make every function accessable to a keyboard, even if it is 15 characters to get to a function (although that's never happened!).

Maybe it is elitist of me, but most people I know (and use the software I write) are far more comfortable with mice, and so I primarily use that as the input device.