On Feb 8, 2006, at 7:36 PM, Dave Salt wrote:
From: "Shmuel Metz (Seymour J.)" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
My experience has been that the users don't learn the alternative
interfaces that are there, even when they have been available for
decades.
I agree with you to a certain extent. Many people move blindly from
one release of an operating system to the next with absolutely no
idea of the enhancements made available in each new release. A
prime example would be the edit COMPARE and HILITE commands, which
few people even seem to know exist. However, this isn't the fault
of over-worked employees who simply don't have time to check out
new operating system features. Instead, blame lies mostly with
software vendors who bury new features in layers of tutorials
instead of making them obvious, and employers who don't take the
time to train and educate their workforce.
Having said all that, there ARE ways to overcome both problems. For
example, an alternative to the regular ISPF interface was installed
at a certain company. There were no announcements and no education
whatsoever. The only way employees knew the new interface existed
was because a new option appeared on the ISPF primary option menu.
Some time afterwards, usage logs showed that more than 1,000
employees (almost the entire IT department) was using the new ISPF
interface on a regular basis.
There are 2 morals to this story:
1) If something is put in front of someone (even if it's as small
as a new option on a menu), people will eventually discover it. If
it's buried in tutorials and/or user manuals, few people will ever
discover it.
2) If software is user-friendly and 'intuitively obvious', people
will try it. If it's easy to learn and use, they'll carry on using
it. Otherwise, they'll never use it again.
Dave:
I think everyone is guilty of not knowing ALL the new features of
each (or a few) of the components. Who is at fault? IBM in one
acronym, IMO.
IBM is pushing 2 releases out every year and there just is not enough
time to even broach the "improvements". IBM sort of makes a rough
pitch on the big changes but the smaller the change seems to get lost
in the dust.
To me this would be a super on-going SHARE session(s). At least you
could ask a question on something specific and get an answer from an
expert (hopefully) in the area. There could be two sessions one in
the morning (say) that revolves around the OS and then in the
afternoon one for "applications" (ISPF, rexx etc).
What do others think of this idea?
Ed
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
