Some points/issues to discuss about the desktop

[John]

>  
>
>>Jeff is a developer, so he has access to (approved!) text editors,
>>compilers & other build tools, maybe OOo for documentation. And the
>>programs he's working on. Not other applications.
>>
>>He don't do the books, so he doesn't have access to the finance tools.  At
>>all.  He doesn't do system backups, so he doesn't have access to those
>>tools either.
>>    
>>
>
>Do desktop users truly require this level of granularity?  It sounds like
>MAC for menu items, and MAC systems are notoriously tricky to configure and
>unintuitive for inexperienced users.
>
>  
>
I don't know about MAC, but in any sizable organisation I'd certainly 
look at it.

In corporate environments, it would be dine for inexperienced users. I 
can only imagine menus of stuff they can't use adds to their confusion. 
What could be easier to learn than a menu (or better, array of 
pushbuttons) of the ten things you're allowed to use?

In a previous life I was a systems programmer. One of my tasks was 
developing ISPF menus. (ISPF uses IBM character-based synchronous 
terminals) for users.

Be sure that the applications programmers tools I was concerned with 
were not accessible to personnel, training, policy and other non-IT 
areas). Including to those who had access to TSO and ISPF.

Groups of programmers also had their own private tools; tools used by 
Pensions were not available to Family Allowances, Payments, UB etc, 
though there were integrated into their menus.

Don't trust me:-) My info is 20 years old. Go ask the people you want to 
get money off what they actually want. Us freeloaders don't really 
count, you won't get rich off us!