Graphical system disadvantages
The body
of positive research, hypotheses, and comment concerning graphical systems is
being challenged by some studies, findings, and opinions that indicate that
graphical representation and interaction may not necessarily always be better.
Indeed, in some cases, it may be poorer than pure textual or alphanumeric
displays. Sometimes arcane, and even bizarre. Among the disadvantages put forth
are these:
Greater
design complexity: Controls and basic alternatives must be chosen
from a pile of choices numbering in
excess of 50. This design potential may not necessarily result in better design
unless proper controls and windows are selected. Poor design can undermine
acceptance.
Learning
still necessary: The first time one encounters many graphical
systems, what to do is not
immediately obvious. A severe learning and remembering requirement is imposed
on many users because meanings of icons or using pointing device have to be
learned.
Lack of experimentally-derived
design guidelines: today there is a lack of widely available experimentally-derived design guidelines. Earlier
only few studies to aid in making design decisions were performed and available
for today now. Consequently, there is too little understanding of how most
design aspects relate to productivity and satisfaction.
Inconsistencies
in technique and terminology: Many differences in technique, terminology, and look and feel exist
among various graphical system providers, and even among successive versions of
the same system. So the user has to learn or relearn again while shifting to
next terminology.
Not
always familiar: Symbolic representations may not be as familiar
as words or numbers. Numeric symbols
elicit faster responses than graphic symbols in a visual search task.
Window
manipulation requirements: Window handling and manipulation times are still excessive and repetitive.
This wastes time
Production
limitations: The number of symbols that can be clearly
produced using today’s technology is
still limited. A body of recognizable symbols must be produced that are equally
legible and equally recognizable using differing technologies. This is
extremely difficult today.
Few
tested icons exist: Icons must be researched, designed, tested, and
then introduced into the
marketplace. The consequences of poor or improper design will be confusion and
lower productivity for users.
Inefficient
for touch typists: For an experienced touch typist, the keyboard is
a very fast and powerful device.
Not
always the preferred style of interaction: Not all users prefer a pure
iconic interface. User will also
prefer alternatives with textual captions.
Not
always fastest style of interaction: graphic instructions on an
automated bank teller machine were
inferior to textual instructions.
May
consume more screen space: Not all applications will consume less screen space. A listing of names and
telephone numbers in a textual format will be more efficient to scan than a
card file.
Hardware
limitations: Good design also requires hardware of adequate
power, processing speed, screen
resolution, and graphic capability.
Related Topics
Privacy Policy, Terms and Conditions, DMCA Policy and Compliant
Copyright © 2018-2023 BrainKart.com; All Rights Reserved. Developed by Therithal info, Chennai.