User Ratings of Key Entry Equipment

January 1973-"IBM has endorsed the concept of key/

disk data entry with the introduction of the 3740/key diskette family of products." Pause. "Well, not quite;

there's a maximum of two keystations per 'processor.' "

December 1973-"IBM has endorsed the concept of key/disk data entry with the introduction of the 3790 Communication System." Pause. "Well, not quite; it's really a transaction processing system in a distributed processing environment. But you could make it a key/disk system with appropriate programming."

July 1975-"IBM has endorsed the concept of key/disk data entry with the introduction of the 3760 Dual Key Entry Station Configuration of the 3790 Communication System. Really, they have." Pause. "Well, haven't they?"

They have.

In the words of one respondent to last year's Datapro survey of user experience with key entry equipment,

"Key/disk is the best thing that ever happened to the key entry field." With IBM's new and very competitive, but slightly different, market entry, additional public emphasis will be centered on key/disk systems. (For a detailed analysis of IBM's new 3790/3760 Data Entry Configuration, see Report 70D-491-43.)

But it should also be noted that during the last few years-in defiance of the apparent trend toward key/disk systems-numerous manufacturers have successfully intro-duced new keypunch models, intelligent terminals, key/

cassette devices, key/diskette devices, on-line CRT's, typewriters for OCR data entry, and various combinations of these. In each case, claims were made that each was the

"best" way to capture data for later processing by computers. And this list does not include the important POS concept of transaction-oriented devices that capture data as a by-product of regular business transactions.

Obviously, different systems problems can call for differ-ent solutions. Every class of product has its inherdiffer-ent strengths and weaknesses, apart from how well the manufacturer of each specific product executes the design, manufacture, and support functions.

Datapro Asks the Users

In April, May, and June of 1975, Datapro collected and analyzed the responses of its subscribers to a questionnaire that was published in the April supplement to DAT APRO 70. The results included in this report shed some light on the overall characteristics of the data entry function, in addition to presenting the users' ratings of a sizeable population of data entry devices and systems.

A key entry device can be considered to consist of three basic components: keyboard, control logic, and medium

This report sums up the experience of 400 users with 823 data entry devices and systems representing a total of 6,684 keying stations.

Their collective experience should help you find effective solutions to your own data entry problems.

for recording. Various levels of sophistication of the control logic portion, a multitude of recording media, and many concepts of system organization lead to a diverse array of products available to handle your data entry problems. Keyboards can have a single-character display, a full CRT presentation, a printer or typewriter, or no means at all for displaying data as it is entered. Control logic can be organized to provide minimum or maximum (read "minicomputer") facilities for checking and mani-pulating data as it is entered. The recording medium can be punched cards, punched tape, magnetic tape in several varieties, magnetic disk (now also in several varieties), or the printed page. The media concept can even be stretched to include a communications line feeding a host computer, thereby bringing intelligent and non-intelligent terminals with no local means for permanently recording data into the purview of data entry devices as defined above.

A separate DATAPRO 70 report, 70D-OI0-70, provides a thorough analysis of the various types of data entry devices and their inherent strengths and weaknesses. The questionnaire mentioned above and our subscribers' responses to it form the subject matter for this report.

The Users Respond

Before the publication cut-off date of June 15, 1975, Datapro received a total of 400 valid responses to the questionnaire, detailing our subscribers' experience with a total of 823 products representing 6,684 keying stations.

(This compares with the results of a similar survey one year earlier that attracted 308 user responses on 637 products and 5,674 keying stations.) The users' 1975 ratings of these products are summarized in Table 1.

Readers are cautioned against extrapolating the results into market penetration figures. There are approximately 400,000 keypunches now installed (give or take

a

hundred thousand or so), compared with an estimated 120,000 key/disk keystations. (However, note that the keypunch base is declining while the key/disk keystation base is expected to grow by about 40 percent in 1975.) The reason why the proportion of key/disk keystations is so much higher in our survey is piObably that many keypunch users felt they had little to share with other users, while key/disk users were much more

missionary-minded. ~

t'f"I1Clo"7E:. nATADcn CI=~I=AR(,~ ('nRPnRATION DELRAN. N.J. 08075

700-010-71 b Peripherals

User Ratings of Key Entry Equipment

TABLE 1. USER RATINGS OF KEY ENTR.Y DEVICES AND SYSTEMS

No. of No. of Overall Ease of Hardware Maintenance Service Key Entry Device Type, User Keying Performance Operation Reliability

Promptness Quality Supplier, and Model Re- Stations

sponses

Repre-WA E G F P WA E G F P WA IE ^G F P WA E G F P WA E G F P sented

KEY/DISK SYSTEMS:

CMC3 3 22 3.3 1 2 00 4.0 3 0 00 3.3 2 1 0 04.0 3 0 0 04.0 3 0 0 0

CMC 5 22 340 3.6 14 8 00 3.5 11 9 1 0 3.3 9 10 2 o 3.3 8 11 2 03.2 8 10 3 0 CMC12 8 138 3.8 6 2 o 0 3.8 6 2 00 3.6 5 3 0 03.0 2 5 0 1 3.0 2 5 0 1 CMC, unspecified 5 128 3.6 3 2 00 4.0 5 0 00 3.8 4 1 0 o 3.2 2 2 1 03.2 1 4 0 0 Data 100 3 28 3.3 1 2 o 0 3.3 1 2 00 3.3 1 2 0 o 3.0 1 1 1 03.0 0 3 0 0 Entrex 480 11 303 3.6 7 4 00 3.7 8 3 00 3.2 4 5 2 o 3.2 4 5 2 03.1 4 4 3 0 Four-Phase I V /70 20 293 3.2 6 12 2 0 3.5 10 9 1 0 3.1 4 14 2 o 2.9 6 8 4 2 3.1 7 9 3 1 GCS 2100 7 188 3.7 5 2 00 3.7 5 2 00 3.4 3 4 0 o 3.3 2 5 0 o 3.3 2 5 0 0 GTE/IS, all models 5 56 3.2 1 4 00 3.4 2 3 00 3.4 2 3 0 o 3.2 3 1 0 1 3.0 1 3 1 0 Honeywell Keyplex 4 132 3.3 1 3 00 2.8 0 3 1 0 3.3 1 3 0 o 2.3 0 2 1 1 2.5 0 3 0 1 Inforex 1301 8 83 3.5 5 2 1 0 3.6 5 3 00 3.1 1 7 0 o 2.8 1 4 3 02.8 0 6 2 0 Inforex 1302 22 318 3.5 14 6 2 0 3.5 12 10 00 3.3 8 12 2 o 3.3 9 11 1 1 3.2 7 12 1 1 Inforex 1303 11 191 3.3 5 4 2 0 3.6 8 2 1 0 3.3 4 6 1 o 3.2 4 5 2 03.1 3 6 2 0 Inforex, unspecified 5 55 3.8 4 1 00 3.8 4 1 00 3.5 2 2 0 o 3.0 1 3 1 03.4 2 3 0 0 Mohawk 1200 6 46 3.2 2 3 1 0 3.3 2 4 00 2.5 1 2 2 1 2.7 0 4 2 02.3 1 2 1 2 Mohawk 2400 11 150 3.5 5 6 o 0 3.5 5 6 00 3.2 3 71 1 o 3.1 4 4 3 03.0 2 8 0 1 Scan-Data 2250 3 54 3.7 2 1 00 4.0 3 0 00 3.3 1 2 0 o 3.7 2 1 0 03.7 2 1 0 0 Univac CADE 5 48 3.4 2 3 o 0 3.8 4 1 o 0 3.2 2 2 1 o 3.4 3 1 1 03.3 2 1 1 0 Others 7 105 3.2 2 4 1 0 3.0 1 5 1 0 2.6 1 5 0 1 2.8 2 2 3 03.0 2 3 2 0 Totals 166 2.678 3.5 86 71 9 0 3.5 95 65 5 0 3.3 58 91 13 2 3.1 59 75 27 63.1 49 88 19 7 KEY/DISKETTE UNITS:

IBM 3741 22 190 3.8 18 4 00 3.5 14 6 2 0 3.5 11 11 0 o 3.3 11 7 4 03.5 13 8 1 0 IBM 3742 34 261 3.8 26 8 00 3.7 24 9 1 0 3.7 25 8 1 o 3.6 23 7 4 03.5 19 12 3 0 IBM 3740. unspec. 7 147 3.6 4 3 00 3.4 3 4 00 3.1 1 6 0 o 2.9 0 6 1 03.0 0 6 0 0 Totals 63 598 3.8 48 .15 00 3.6 41 19 3 0 3.6 37 25 1 o 3.4 34 20 9 03.5 32 26 4 0 KEY/CASSETTE UNITS:

Sycor 340 6 116 3.3 2 4 o 0 3.3 4 1 o 1 3.7 4 2 0 o 3.0 1 4 1 03.0 1 4 1 0 Others 6 34 2.7 0 4 20 2.3 0 3 2 1 2.5 0 4 1 1 2.8 1 3 2 02.3 0 3 2 1 Totals 12 150 3.0 2 8 2 0 2.8 4 4 2 2 3.1 4 6 1 1 2.9 2 7 3 02.7 1 7 3 1 ON-LINE:

,10

All vendors 6 262 3.0 1 4 2.7 1 2 3 0 2.8 1 3 2 o 3.5 3 3 0 03.5 3 3 0 0 Lt::Gt::ND: WA-Weighted Average, E-Excellent, G-Good, F-Fair, P-Poor. The Weighted Average for each category is based on assigning weights of 4, 3, 2, and 1

for Excellent, Good, Fair, and Poor. respectively.

t>

While we're comparing the response levels of keypunch and key/disk system users, a little comparative informa-tion between last year's and this year's survey is in order.

Last year there were 453 responses representing 2,747 keypunches; this year there were 500 responses on 2,559 keypunches. While the number of responses increased by 10 percent, the number of keypunches represented went down by 7 percent. This caused the average number of keypunches per response represented in the surveys to decrease from 6.1 in 1974 to 5.1 in 1975.

Meanwhile, the number of responses for key/disk systems jumped from 92 to 166, an 80 percent increase. Parallel-ing this was only a 36 percent increase in the number of keystations reported on (from 1,977 to 2,678), but a jump of 46 percent in the number of systems reported on (from 177 to 258). Averaged out, these numbers represent a decrease in the number of keystations per system (down to 10.4 from 11.2) and keystations per response (down to

16.1 from 21.5). These statistics tend to support (but not conclusively prove) the attitude that key/disk systems are being increasingly accepted by smaller EDP installations.

Last year, we noted with surprise the high ratings given to the small sampling of on-line data entry systems un-covered during the survey. This year, the sampling was even smaller, and the degree of acceptance lower. Again, several users commented on the high cost of on-line data entry.

Overall, the users' additional comments were very similar to last year's results. Several extolled the key/disk concept, and many gave more detail to explain and augment their equipment ratings. One comment was just too good to pass up, however: "The Sycor 340 intelligent terminal has provided instant happiness because of its extensive capability to catch ordinary keyboarding errors.

It has reduced computer error lists by over 99%." This

t::

700-010-71c Peripherals

User Ratings of Key Entry Equipment

TABLE 1. USER RATINGS OF KEY ENTRY DEVICES AND SYSTEMS (Continued)

No. of Key Entry Device Type, No. of

Keying Overall Supplier, and Model User

Stations Performance

Re-sponses Repre·

sented WA E G F P WA 80-COLUMN KEYPUNCHES

AND VERIFIERS:

1 Burroughs 1 11 1 22 1 3.31 5 412 o ^3.4

I

IBM 24 8 74 2.9 1 5 2 0 2.9

IBM 26 20 69 2.9 4 10 6 0 3.0

IBM 29 167 873 3.2 45 109 12 1 3.2

1 IBM 56 6 15 3.0 2 2 2 0 3.0

1 IBM 59 25 106 3.0 3 20 2 0 3.1

IBM 129 168 991 3.4 78 85 5 0 3.3

IBM, unspecified 4 8 2.0 0 1 2 1 1.8

Tab Products 8 17 2.9 1 5 2 0 3.5

Univac 1700 5 42 2.8 1 2 2 0 3.0

Univac 1701 16 104 3.3 6 8 2 0 3.3 Univac 1710 47 205 3.2 16 25 3 2 3.4

Univac 1800 12 25 3.7 8 4 o 0 3.2

Univac, unspecified 3 8 3.0 0 3 o ^{0 3.3}

Totals 500 2,559 3.2 170 283 42 4 3.2 96-COLUMN KEYPUNCHES;

Burroughs 4 9 3.8 3 1

t

^3.8

Decision Data 12 37 3.3 6 4 2 0 3.6

IBM 9 25 3.4 4 5 o ^{0 3.7}

Totals 25 71 3.4 13 10 2 0 3.6 I

KEY/TAPE UNITS:

Burroughs Series N 3 6 3.7 2 ' 1 o ^{0 3.7}

Honeywell 700 Series 4 49 2.8 0 3 1 0 3.0 Honeywell, unspecified 4 23 3.0 0 4 o 0 3.3 Mohawk 1100 Series 4 30 3.3 1 3 o ^{0 3.3}

Mohawk 6400 Series 10 122 2.9 1 7 2 0 2.5

NCR 735 4 16 3.0 1 2 1 0 2.8

NCR 736 8 74 3.3 4 2 2 0 2.6

Singer 4000 Series 9 36 2.7 2 3 3 1 2.7

Others 5 10 3.0 1 3 1 0 2.8

Totals 51 366 3.0 12 28 10 1 2.6

GRAND TOTALS 823 6,684 3.3 332 419 66 53.3 LEGEND: See preceding page.

!> same comment could apply to other intelligent terminals, key /disk systems, intelligent keypunches, etc. It reflects the great improvement in data preparation efficiency that results from having data validation capabilities present in the key entry equipment itself.

The Software Bugaboo

A supplement to the ratings information appears in Table 2, which is a tabulation of the users' ratings of the software and technical support provided by the vendors of key/disk systems. We expanded last year's single rating question to two for the current survey to permit distinguishing between the standard product facilities (software) and the degree of assistance the vendors give in support of their customers' installations (technical support). The raw numbers in the chart provide their own eloquence and need little editorial commentary. However, a general comment is in order.

Maintenance Service Ease of Hardware

Operation Reliability Promptness Quality E G F P WA E G F P WA E G F P WA E G F P

5 51110 2.61 3 3 3 2 2.5 3 2 3 3 2.5 2 5 1 31 1 5 2 0 2.4 1 3 2 2 3.1 2 5 1 o ^3.1 2 5 1 0 6 8 6 0 3.0 3 14 3 o 3.3 6 13 1 o ^3.2 ⁶ ¹¹ 3 0 50 98 16 1 3.2 54 91 11 3 3.3 69 78 16 2 3.2 54 90 16 1 2 2 2 0 3.2 3 1 2 o 3.5 3 3 0 o 3.3 3 2 1 0 4 18 2 0 2.9 3 17 3 1 3.3 9 13 2 o ^3.0 ⁵ ¹⁵ ⁴ ⁰

65 92 8 0 3.3 66 87111 1 3.3 73 70 19 3 3.2 58 80 19 0 0 0 3 1 2.0 0 2 0 2 3.0 2 1 0 1 2.5 1 1 1 1 4 4 o 0 2.3 0 3 4 1 2.8 1 4 3 o 2.6 1 3 4 0 1 3 1 0 2.2 0 1 4 o 2.3 0 2 1 1 2.5 1 1 1 1 6 8 2 0 3.1 5 8 3 o 3.1 5 9 1 1 3.1 4 9 2 0 19 27 1 0 2.9 14 17 113 2 3.2 19 21 4 3 2.9 13 21 10 3 3 8 1 0 3.3 4 8 0 o 3.3 3 9 1 o 3.3 4 6 1 0 1 2 o 0 2.3 0 1 2 o ^3.0 ⁰ ³ ⁰ o ^2.7 ⁰ ² 1 0 1167 1280 45 2 3.2 156 1256 167 114 3.2,11 1233 52 114 3.1 154 251 65 9

3.0 I

3 1 o 0 2 0 011 3.2 2 1 ' 1 o ^3.0 2 1 0 1 8 3 1 0 3.0 I 3 6 3 o ^3.0 ⁵ ³ ³ ^{1 2.9} ⁴ ⁴ ³ ¹

6 3 o 0 3.4 5 3 1 o ^3.7 ⁷ ¹ ¹ o ^3.7 ⁶ ³ 0 0 17 7 1 0 3.2 10 9 4 1 3.3 14 5 5 1 3.2 12 8 3 2

2 1 o 0 4.0 3 0 0 o 3.7 2 1 0 o 3.3 1 2 0 0 0 4 o 0 2.5 0 2 2 o 2.8 1 2 0 1 2.8 0 3 1 0 1 3 o 0 2.8 0 3 1 o 2.5 0 3 0 1 2.8 0 3 1 0 2 1 1 0 3.8 ; 3 1 0 o 3.0

;1

² ¹ ^o^3.5 ² ² ^{0 0}

0 5 5'0 2.6 1 7 0 1 2.9 .j 2 4 o ^2.9 2 3 4 0 1 2 o 1 3.0 1 2 1 o 2.8 1 2 0 1 2.8 1 1 2 0 2 3 1 2 2.9 2 3 3 o 2.9 2 4 1 1 3.3 3 4 1 0 1 4 4 0 2.7 2 4 1 2 2.4 0 5 3 1 2.6 1 4 3 1 1 3 o 1 3.6 3 2 0 o 2.6 1 2 1 1 2.8 1 3 0 1 10 26 11 4 3.0 15 24 8 3 2.8 11 23 10 6 2.9 11 25 12 2 335 403 708 3.2 281 414 96 21 3.2 319 366 106 27 3.1 259 408 109 21

A key/disk system can be regarded as a data processing computer site in miniature. All of the elements of traditional data processing are present: job-to-job control, file specification, processing specification, management of input and output data streams, etc. Integrating these systems into an overall data processing plan is complex.

Many decisions are required to completely specify which of the data handling functions are handled where. For example, one user complained that he was unable to sort data records on his key/disk system. There is a large difference in the processing power of the central units in a key/disk system and in the host computer system.

Convenience and efficiency of entering and correcting data while the source documents are still handy must be weighed against the increased processing efficiency normally available with the large host processor.

The key tying all these decisions together for the user is

70D-010-71d Peripherals

User Ratings of Key Entry Equipment

TABLE 2. USER RATINGS OF KEY/DISK SOFTWARE AND TECHNICAL SUPPORT User Ratings Average

Key/Disk Number Number of Number of

Number of Manufactu rer of User Keystations Systems

Keystations Software Technical Support and Model Responses Represented Represented

per System

WA E G F P WA E G F P

CMC3 3 22 4 5.5 3.3 1 2

o

0 3.7 2 1 0 0

CMC5 22 340 35 9.7 3.2 4 17

o

0 3.1 4 13 2 0

CMC12 8 138 8 17.3 3.6 4 3

o

0 3.0 3 3 1 1

CMC, unspecified 5 128 8 16.0 3.5 2 2

o

0 3.8 3 1 0 0

Data 100 3 28 4 7.0 3.3 1 2

o

0 2.3 0 2 0 1

Entrex 480 11 303 19 15.9 3.5 7 2 2,0 3.2 5 2 3 0

Four-Phase IV /70 20 293 38 7.7 2.9 5 8 7 0 2.7 4 8 5 3

GCS 2100 7 188 12 15.7 3.0 1 5 1 0 2.6 0 5 1 1

GTE/IS, all models 5 56 7 8.0 1.8 0 0 4 1 2.7 0 2 1 0 Honeywell Keyplex 4 132 6 22.0 2.3 0 1 2 0 2.8 0 3 1 0

I nforex 1301 8 83 11 7.5 2.9 1 5 2 0 2.9 2 3 3 0

I nforex 1302 22 318 31 10.3 3.0 4 9 4 0 2.9 5 9 6 1

Inforex 1303 11 191 29 6.6 2.5 0 6 3 1 3.0 1 8 1 0

Inforex, unspecified 5 55 8 6.9 3.2 2 2 1 0 3.2 2 2 1 0

Mohawk 1200 6 46 7 6.6 2.7 2 1 2 1 2.5 1 2 2 1

Mohawk 2400 11 150 13 11.5 3.0 3 2 3 0 2.8 4 1 4 1

Scan-Data 2250 3 54 3 18.0 3.0 0 2

o

^{0 3.0 0} 2 0 0

Univac CADE 5 48 5 9.6 3.5 2 2 00 3.0 2 1 0 1

Others 7 105 10 10.5 3.4 3 4

o

0 2.4 0 3 4 0

Totals 166 2,678 258 10.4 3.0 42 75 31 3 2.9 38 71 35 10 LEGEND: WA-Weighted Average, E-Excellent, G-Good, F-·Fair, P-Poor.

I> key /disk systems, and the willingness and capability of each manufacturer to assist the user in formulating his plans. The prospective user would be well advised to work out his approach prior to installing a key/disk system, even though this entails extra work due to the differences in software support available. Making specific support functions part of the proposal goes a long way toward reducing misunderstandings between vendor and user.

But \AJhat Is Data Entry, Anyway?

In the questionnaire, we asked several questions to try to characterize the data entry function. These questions pertained to throughput (records per day), record size, format usage, and automatic field generation (average keystrokes per record). The results are tabulated in Table 3 as percentages to permit comparisons among different types of devices to be made more easily. The IBM 29 and 129 keypunches are shown individually to highlight the differences between buffered (129) and unbuffered (29) keypunches.

The output of a keypunch is traditionally regarded as about 1,000 cards per day per keypunch, for single-shift operation. However, many of the respondents reported a much lower level of usage than this. Of course, many of these users had only a few keypunches used in supporting roles for punching up JeL cards, source program decks, etc.; but several installations that fell in this category were sizeable ones that had more than six keypunches. No firm conclusions can be drawn without a detailed study, but it seeI1!s likely that such installations have decided to

decentralize their data entry functions by spreading the keypunches out among the various departments originat-ing the information.

Users of key/disk systems backed up the manufacturers' claims of increased throughput; 61 % reported daily keying rates of over 1,000 records, and 33% of these users reported rates of over 1,500 records per day. However, 48% of the IBM 129 users also reported daily rates of over 1,000 records, with 33% reporting a daily rate of over 1,500 records. Generally, the keypunch users were operating with shorter records and without the benefits of data editing and validation procedures, but it is still quite apparent that the modern buffered keypunch represents a significant improvement over unbuffered ones.

Last year we noted that for all device types taken together, over half (52%) were being used with record lengths of 60 or fewer characters, and that about half (51 %) of the key / disk users remained with the old keypunch limitation of 80 characters. This year, more than half of all the responding users (60%) employed record lengths of over 60 characters, but the proportion of key/disk users going keyond the 80-character boundary decreased to 35% from 49% last year. No doubt the influx of smaller users into key/disk systems had some influence on this result. (Note that these record lengths correspond to the amount of data keyed, and do not take into account reformatting with key /disk systems.)

The figures summarizing the average number of format levels per job are essent~ally self-explanatory. They need

t::::

70D-010-71e Peripherals

User Ratings of Key Entry Equipment

TABLE 3. CHARACTERISTICS OF KEY ENTRY OPERATIONS

Records per Day per Average Characters Average Format Levels Average % of

Keying Station, % per Record, % per Job, % Record Keyed*

Type of

Device Un- Un- O- 26- 51-

76-No.of der 500- 751· 1001· Over 76-No.of der 40· 61· 81· Over No.of 0- 3· 6·' Over No.of 25 50 75 100 Resp. 500 750 1000 1500 1500 Resp. 40 60 80 150 150 Resp. 1 2 5 10 10 Resp. % % % %

Keypunches-IBM 29 271

I

¹²³

^44\ ^18\

¹³ ^\ ¹⁰ ¹⁵ ¹⁵⁴ ^{16 40\44}

^g\

⁰

I

¹⁴⁷ ^{42 27}¹³

!I li ^I

¹²⁴ 10 18 45 IBM 129 128 12 18 22 15 33 160 8 38 54 0 158 30 30 25 141 4 26 44 26\

All Others 149 26 22 15 16 21 174 14 38 48 0 0 165 32 37 21 156 6 27 47 20 Total 400 27 19 17 14 23 488 13 39 48 0 0 470 34 32 20 6 8 421 7 24 45 24 Key/Tape 40 37 15 5 23 20 51 4 14 60 16 6 50 40 20 18 12 10 47 9 23 40 28 Key /Diskette 47 19 13 6 23 39 63 3 21 43 33 0 62 32 14 34 18 2 58 2 24 48 26 Key /Cassette 9 22 22 34 0 22 12 8 17 33 42 0 12 25

o

⁶⁷ ⁸ ⁰ ¹⁰

o

10 70 20 Key/Disk 148 12 11 16 28 33 165 4 16 45 31 4 161 9 20 52 11 8 153 2 27 43 28 TOTALS 644 23 17 15 18 27 779 10 30 48 11 1 755 29 27 28 8 8 689 5 25 45 25 Resp. -Responses.

*Average keystrokes per record as a percentage of total characters per record.

~ little comment beyond noting that the increased number of format levels provided with most key/disk systems does not seem as important to most users as does the capability to store a library of formats to provide convenient retrieval of format sets for many different jobs.

A new question was added to the Reader Survey Form this year to try to resolve the discrepancy between characters keyed per record and characters recorded per record. The difference occurs because of the facilities for automatic duplication in all types of key entry equipment and for automatic field generati(}n in key/disk and other processor·based (intelligent) devices. Surprisingly, there were hardly any meaningful differences among the various types of devices. The conclusion is obvious: automatic field generation for key/disk systems, also called table look-up, is relatively untapped as yet. A typical example is the use of a table of customer names and addresses, which are automatically fetched and inserted into the record when the operator keys just the customer number.

What About Tomorrow?

Having determined the degree of user satisfaction and usage patterns, we turn to some market considerations.

Table 4 presents the plans our subscribers reported for migrating from one type of key entry device to another.

There are no surprises in this chart. Because we did not correlate last year's or this year's distribution of returns in terms of installed base sizes, we cannot make a direct evaluation of the accuracy of last year's migration plans as reflected in this year's device-type distribution. However, the pattern of users' plans remains similar. An increasing number of keypunch users want to change. The key / diskette approach has picked up some additional support, and key/disk users are even more satisfied than last year.

For Other Information

This report has discussed the key entry function itself and presented users' ratings of specific products. It by no means exhausts what DAT APRO 70 has to say about key entry and key entry products. Nearly all of the devices shown in Table 1 (except for the older IBM keypunches and key verifiers) are covered in individual product reports that follow this report in Binder 2; the reports are arranged alphabetically by manufacturer. The Index can be used profitably to find all of the Datapro reports on a particular type of equipment by looking under a generic head, such as "keypunches, 80-column." In addition, a guide to selecting and buying data entry devices is contained in Report 70D-OIO·70, which immediately precedes this report. 0

TABLE 4. ANTICIPATED MIGRATION IN TYPES OF KEY ENTRY DEVICES Plan to change to the following device types, %*

Users of the following Number of

types of devices Responses No Change

Key/Tape Key/Disk Key/Diskette On·Line Other Planned

Keypunches 423 4 26 12 17 2 46

Key/Tape 44

-

¹⁸ ¹⁶ ³⁰ ² ³⁶

Key /Diskette 52 0 4 - 11 4

8'-Key /Cassette 12 0 8 42 0 8 42

Key/Disk 141 0 - 1 13 4 82

*Percentages may total more than 100% for some device types because some users indicated plans to change to more than one type.

700-010-78a Peripherals

Im Dokument Contents of Volume 2 datopro (Seite 150-155)

a

,10

t>

t::

I

t

;1

o

o

o

o

o

o

o

t::::

I

44\ 18\

g\

I

!I li I

o

o

-

^44\ ^18\

^g\

!I li ^I