>>>Not only that, but many times you can only make your GUI as effective as the customer will allow. You can design an impressive GUI and the customer may want a 'dos-based appearance.' I've had apps with dual type GUIs and each user chose the design they wanted to use. Sometimes they want it to look like something else they saw even when that design may not be as efficient. I can't count the number of times a customer has insisted on a different appearance or approach based on any number of things. It's all about pleasing the customer in the end.
>>
>>You're abosolutely right....
>>I've taking over some FPD application in 1995 or so, with a typical DOS GUI. It seems very ancient to us as developers, but everytime I visit the shop I wrote it for I'm amazed with how well they are getting along with the application: They only need the mouse to start the application, the rest is keyboard only.
>>
>>
>>Again as I said before in this thread: Impressive GUIs <> effective GUIs
>>
>
>I don't understand that distinction. Isn't an impressive GUI one that is easy and productive to use? i.e. effective.

Nope, they are two different things. An impressive GUI (or in this case a pretty GUI) does not neccesarily mean a GUI that is clear to the user. GUI controls could form a piece of art for any outsider, but at the same time very ineffective because the user wastes time to get things done.

The best example I've got is on OLD Dos program where there is nothing fancy, but if I look at how the users are using the program, I'm amazed every time again and again. Those users are by not any means skilled computer users, hell the owner of the shop barely knows how to write a letter in word. I've got to tell them how to locate a file and do something with it (I usually go up there as I know they just don't have the skills to do even simple jobs).

But again if you see them using the Stock tracking software written in FPD2.6, It is even hard for me to tell what steps they are doing. It goes very quickly and flawless. At some time I offered to do this program in VFP, but after I saw how they worked with their current program, I only saw problems in flow control and effectiveness when converting to a standard Windows interface. I'd anticipated a lot of support things. At the end of they I talked to the owner and I said, "While I could convert the program to VFP, it would not gain you much, as I see you're already using this software as effective as you could".

I don't know about in your area of the world, but DOS programs are all over the place. the hairdresser, Rental shops, Garage, or any other shop using cash programs. And even if they are written in Windows, they often behave like DOS programs (Control flowed menus, menu driven in stead of event driven). For a lot of those applications the prettyness of the screen which can be done in Windows is far less important than the effectiveness of the GUI.

Now I won't deny the GUI is a good selling point to clients, but in the end they have to work with it and effectiveness is more important the how the programs looks like. Ergonomics of the GUI is the number one priority in my book, though of course we like to unify that with a pretty GUI as well.

Walter,