I am looking for some ideas on enhancing a trial-user's user experience when he uses a product for the first time. The product is aimed at a particular domain and has various features/workflows. Experienced users of the product naturally find interesting ways to combine features to get the results they want (somewhat like using an IDE from a programmer's perspective).Trial users get to use all features of the product in a limited fashion (For ex: If there is a search functionality, the trial-user might see only the top 20 results, or he may be allowed to search only a 100 times). My question is: What are the best ways to help a trial-user explore/understand the possibilities of the product in the trial period, especially in the first 20 - 60 mins before the user gives up on the product?
Edit 1: The product is a desktop app (served via JNLP, so no install required) and as pointed out in the comments, the expectations can be different in this case. That said, many webapps do take a virtual desktop form and so, all suggestions are welcome.
Check out how blinksale.com handles this. It's an invoicing app, but to prevent it from looking too empty for a new account, they show static images in places where you'd actually have content if you used the app. Makes it look less barren at first until you get your own data in.
if you can, avoid feature limiting a trial. it stops the user from experiencing what the product is ACTUALLY like. It also prevents a user from finding out if a feature actually works like they want/expect/need it to.
if you have a trial version, and you can, optimise it for first time use. focus on / highlight the features that allow the user to quickly and easily get benefits for useful output from the system.
allow users to export any data they enter into a trial system - and indicate that this is possible/easy. you don't want them to be put off from trying something because of a potential for wasted effort.
avoid users being required to do lots of configuration before using a trial. prepopulate settings based on typical/common/popular settings. you may also want to consider having default settings for different types of usage. e.g. "If you want to see what the system is like for scenario X, use configuration J. If you want to see what the system is like for use case Y, use configuration K." where J & K are collections of settings best suited to a particular type of usage.
I'll speak from personal experience while evaluating trial applications.
The most annoying trial applications are those which keep popping up nag screens or constantly reminding me that I'm using a trial. Trials which act exactly like the real product from the beginning till the end of the trial period are just awesome. Limited features are annoying, the only exception I can think of when you could use it is where you have rarely used feature which would allow people to exploit the trial (by using this "once-in-lifetime" needed feature and uninstalling). If you have for example video editing software trial which puts "trial" watermark on output, I'd uninstall it as soon as I'd notice it. In my opinion trial should seamlessly integrate into user work-flow so that once the trial ends they would think "Hey, I have been using this awesome program almost each day since I got the trial, I absolutely have to buy it." Sure some people will exploit it, but at the end you should target the group which will use your product in daily work-flow instead of one time users. Even if user "trials" it 2 times per year, he will keep coming back to your product and might even buy it after 2nd or 3rd "one-time use".
(Sorry for the wall of the text and rant)
As for how to improve the first session. I usually find my way around programs easily, but one time only pop-up/screen (or with check-box to never show it again) with videos showing off best features and intended work-flow are quite helpful. Also links to sample documents might be helpful. If your application can self-present itself (for example slide-show about the your slide-show program) you could include such document. People don't like to read long and boring help files, but if you have designer in your team, you could ask him to make a short colourful intro pdf. Also don't throw all the features at the user at the same time. Split information into simple categories and if user is interested into one specific category keep feeding him more specific information. That's why videos are so good, with 3-6 x ~3-5 minute videos you can tell a lot. Also depending how complex your program is you could include picture with information where specific things are located on the screen.
Just my personal opinion, I have never made a trial myself. Hope it helps.
An interactive walk through/lab exercise that really highlights the major and exciting offerings of your application.
Example: Yahoo mail does the same when the users opt to use new mail interface
There are so many ways you can go with this. I still can't claim to have found the best approach.
However, my plan from the beginning with my online (Silverlight) software was to give away something thousands of people will find useful and can use for free. The free version is pretty well representative of the professional product, with only a few features missing that enhance productivity (I'm working on those professional features now). And then I do have a nag popup that comes up every 5 minutes suggesting that you should buy it. That popup can be dismissed as many times as you want. I know that popup will annoy some people but I suppose that's the trade off. There is no perfect plan. But I don't think the occasional nag popup scares that many people away, especially when it can be dismissed with a single click.
I was inspired by Balsamiq Mockups, which has been hugely successful over the past couple years. My trial/nag popup way of doing things was copied almost exactly from Balsamiq. I honestly don't know if this is the ideal plan, but it has obviously worked for them. By the way, I think another reason for Balsamiq's success is that the demo doesn't have to be downloaded & installed. Since the demo is in Flash, there's a very high conversion rate of users actually trying it and becoming addicted to it.
Related
I was thinking about a way to sort of automate my job/have to look through less LinkedIn profiles.
So here is my question. Would it be possible to write a program that would search LinkedIn for you with your "keywords" and have to program automatically click through the profiles, then when it clicks a profile search for each individual keyword and keep count, then export the amount of times the keywords are mentioned to a word document, then go back and do that to each profile. I have no ides what language could do this though and I only have a highschool class worth of Javascript so I would be teaching myself how to do this. I could run this program and night and come back in the morning and be able to look through the best profiles and waste less time looking though ones where people do not have the experience they say they do.
Basically it would go:
Execute search
click first profile
find total number of keywords
export to word
click back or return to results button
next profile
repeat for, say, 300 profiles.
I don't know how feasible this would be to figure out how to write or if its even really possible. Thanks for the helpful replies!
I got some help on reddit, and the replier said that it would probably be easiest in Ruby/RubyGems?
Your best option would probably be to use a process called "scraping"; You extract the html from the page and sort through it for useful information.
Programming languages are like religons; different people say different languages are the best. For parsing html most people (not all) would agree a high-level language like Ruby or Python would be best. However, you did specify ruby, so start by installing it.
After installing ruby (see here), run gem install nokogiri
You can look for general guides on nokogiri here. Start by looking at the source code and seeing where the interesting information is (eg. links to the profiles on the search page). 300 profiles should be no problem. However, when you are testing make sure you only try 3 or 4 profiles at a time. A program requesting 300 pages being run many times may get noticed, but a one-time run should be fine (no guarantees).
Also, I would not recomend exporting to word. You can scan the raw text for keywords and it will be much faster.
As a final note, this will take a long time. From what it sounds like you haven't programmed much before (although previous experience in javascript will help). A lot of your time will most likely be spent reading through tutorials and searching your problem on google. Feel free to come back here when you have specific problems, and good luck!
I would really appreciate your help with finding out how long it takes a 1-3 year experenced programmer to convert a few HTML pages into joomla 1.5 dynamic pages. I know that some of it depends on how complex the pages are but i'm talking about average pages. That's my first question, my other question is how long will it take a 1-3 year experenced programmer to install all of these componants: Video module, photo gallery module, vertuemart shopping cart. I pay programmers to do this work but i have to make as sure as i can that i'm not over paying them. Thanks in advance for answering these two questions...George
Depends on complexity and quality of html/css design. Usually 1+ hours, if you want additional modules styled( K2, etc..) you need to add extra time, if style is different for every page, than it take more, plus configuration. Basically conversion is not that difficult, just replace main text with content and add some blocks/regions. I would say average about 8 hours
As already mentioned, it depends... there's not really anywhere near enough info to give even a rough estimate.
Is Joomla already installed? If it is installed and the desired template is in place, then cutting-and-pasting some page content can take a few minutes if it's just text. If not, allow 2-3 hours for basic installation, including debugging and testing of the standard components like sending email. Then another 1-2 hours for basic installation of components. Testing, debugging and setup of Virtuemart can take a lot longer, depending on what options for shipping and payments you want.
If you're using a good pre-built template that you're 100% happy with then there should be little to do there, but just positioning and adding discovering what menus work best in which module positions can take a lot of time. Often there is no support in a template for particular components so further styling for the additions is required. Purchased templates vary wildly in quality, some are just not worth the effort, and sometimes template developers take quick-and-dirty shortcuts to get components to look good in their demo, but can take hours to sort out to be useful for anything else.
If you want the Joomla site to look like your old site, or have a custom template built, or radically convert an existing template it can take the length of a piece of string. (One of my clients will easily spend 20 hours endlessly asking me to slightly change spacing, fonts, and colors after signing off on a design and promising that he wouldn't make any more changes. I guess because he can't visualize how things look until he sees the completed site.)
There are plenty of good photo galleries that are bug-free. That shouldn't take long, especially if it comes with a template you already like.
So you may be wondering why all the estimates above vary so much. It just depends on what you've got and what you are really looking for, and what experience the "programmer" has, if it is even in Joomla, or some other CMS, or PHP, or whatever.
Step one in a project like this is to find a programmer you trust not to rip you off; get reliable references if it's someone new. Then get as good an estimate from him or her as he can give, bearing in mind he might have no experience of how you work or how detailed you've been in laying out the plan. Getting an estimate from someone else is not worth much. Then get progress reports as you go along to see where the hours are going so you can judge how to proceed cost-effectively.
is hard to answer at your Q's, the info providet by you is insuficient to make an estimation.
You didn't mentioned anything about customization, complexity of functionalities, integration of those component. Also the time frame depend on the programmer experience and knowledge in Joomla! not just Html knowledge.
Usually, to install some component is easy, lets say for the components you mentioned i need something like 6-8 h, but this is just the installation process. From here to a good joomla! website is a long way. The more time consuming is the customization and integration of all the functionalities, and this depend on clients requests.
You mentioned Virtuemart, this also can be a bottle neck, Virtuemart installation depend on the shop categories and products no., shipping integration, payment method, images processing,
Other Issue can be the template integration, for a good website is better to have the same look on all the components, VM, Photo gallery etc Your template is acquired one or is a custom development?
But to answer at your Q 1,
1) 5 to 10 pages should take 2-4h (text edit, custom typography)
2) 40 to 80h for Video module, photo gallery module, Virtuemart shopping chart
Keep in mind that is just a rough estimation.
Roland
In my opinion, it should take no more than 2-3 hours with minimal configuration included. The only thing that would need more time than this is the video component. Configuration of these components should make the time vary.
Closed. This question is opinion-based. It is not currently accepting answers.
Want to improve this question? Update the question so it can be answered with facts and citations by editing this post.
Closed 3 years ago.
Improve this question
I currently work in a small business (15-20 employees, 5 programmers) where most projects are custom built CMS and a few web applications products.
Since I started working there, I have worked on many projects, but specifications for each project vary a lot. Sometimes we get a little detail, a Word document telling what the client wants, and what we are suggesting (suggested form fields, a short description of display, etc.). Sometimes almost nothing except "do what you think is the best approach for this project/module/request".
My question to you guys, who might work in different kind of businesses, is: How (huge pile of paper? Word docs? Visios?) and what kind of information do you get from your superiors, managers, teamates when starting a project (plenty of analysis, drawings, etc.)? How much detail do you get on this?
Hope my question is clear enough, thank you.
Specs..that's kind of funny...how about never :(.
Seriously a lot of companies assume specs aren't needed, its absolutely unacceptable but this is how it is in a LOT of companies. They assume a one liner and the programmer knows what the program should do, the inputs / outputs and so on.
Unfortunately in my case I have to actually help write the specs..and Im the programmer :(.
I mostly get a lot of verbal direction and I use a voice recorder to record the conversation and transcribe it when I am done. I write my own specs from my customers' words.
Then, as a good consultant should, I take the writeup back to the customer and verify it, and get a signature and build it, and they live happily every after! (no they dont, they change their mind a 100 times)
It can vary depending on what group the work falls under:
Support request - If the change will take a short period of time and is fixing something broken, there is this group. This could be as simple as, "Add Bob to the list of authorized users for that ancient form" where the form is something written years ago and aside from adding and removing users, it isn't touched for fear of breaking things.
Service Advisory Committee request - Items that are up to a few days are in this group as these are kind of like mini-projects as the request may be to create a new form or portal for a group. This could be upgrading some 3rd party software where we have some customizations that make the upgrade not necessarily a simple thing for Operations to do.
Project - In this case there are usually a few Word documents and/or e-mail threads that help nail down requirements in terms of scope, budget, and time. These can take months though there is something to be said for having a prototype to change rather than creating the initial prototype to tell if requirements are really met or not. Course my current project is over a year old, still has a few more months to the timeline and already has a successor coming after it is done,i.e. there is a Phase II to go after Phase I.
Uber project - These merit their own group of documentation and are the million dollar, multiple company projects that usually try to document everything up front rarely works out well here. Thus, there is some adoptioon of agile for these but there are still some growing pains to go through as how we use agile matures. Think installing a dozen modules of some off-the-shelf software that requires both internal and external developers to customize the suite for our specific needs as the software is supposed to be very robust, flexible and help save lots of time and money on how people otherwise do their jobs generally. Think ERP or CRM for a couple of examples here.
We are a 16-person company that creates and supports customized software for small retail shop owners.
The projects we get fall into three general categories (as related to specs):
"Here, automate this form." A sales person explains that our customer only wants this form to appear where they can fill it out and print it to make it look professional to their customer. Our specs is a single piece of paper that looks something like an order form or report. This is always false; they want pop-up lookups, automatic updating from other sources, and "while you're at it" add-ons that more than double the time. These, we've learned to just live in the moment and let the project take its course. By the time we're done, the program doesn't look anything like their original form.
Small changes. Like a simple e-mail explaining that the background color is stale, or a request to sort a report by a different column. These, we just do as time allows.
Big company integrations, where we're tasked with making our software work with some big outfit like Intuit (QuickBook) or FedEx (shipping rates). These often have well thought out documentation and sample code. We get 100's of pages in word documents or pdfs. The problem with these is when their specs are wrong. We find out about inaccuracies when we try to test or certify our integration. In these instances, we usually take longer in certification than we did to originally develop the processes.
In all cases, the real trouble is when a sales person promises a solution to the customer before even asking a programmer what it would take. As recently as 2 weeks ago, a sales person got into real trouble and had to issue a refund (that person is no longer with the company).
None - at least not from management.
Instead, as a developer (and particularly one leading a software project right now), I'm expected to contact my users/customers/etc and work directly with them to come up with our specifications and requirements. The documentation I do request from my team is only what will be useful to the team. I am lucky in that management rarely requests a document that doesn't make sense or won't provide some use to our project.
I currently have a half-dozen or so specs each 60-80 pages. One of them is 80 pages with no table of contents. Good times.
Our Product Managers and senior engineers prepare three planning docs for our data management software projects.
High-level requirements: 1-to-3 sentence descriptions of hardware/software supported or specific feature for this project. (10-15 pages of Excel-like grids)
Technical details: Engineering implementation of each high-level requirements. Up to a page for each, depending on amount of detail. (30-40 pages of filled-in feature details)
Business agreement: Summary of 1 & 2 with engineering schedule and Product Mgmt's market analysis. Everyone signs off on this. (5 pages analysis, 20 technical)
I haven't seen work flows or other Visio-like details in our specs. The prioritized requirements and schedule prove critical, so we understand when to lop things off to save development and testing time.
I definitely appreciate a good interface and as a developer, I try to create them for my users. But appreciating a good interface and designing one are a different thing. I'm looking for good interfaces (such as IMHO StackOverflow, Gmail) as examples of good UI from which I can model my own UI's.
I personally think that Netflix has an excellent web UI. Responsive, easy to navigate. Not mutch CRUD going on, but I find it very comfortable.
Pretty much anything by google, really. They're all very simple and to the point, focusing on usability.
You should get yourself a copy of both Don't Make Me Think and The Non-Designer's Design Book for your base knowledge/insight.
From there, it's much easier for you to dissect and analyze the layouts you already know and like, and recreate them for your own amusement.
edit: To mitigate misunderstanding, the point I'm trying to make is that you probably don't need as many good examples of nice layouts, if you know what to look for. For example, I can be shown a thousand haute couture dresses, and I still couldn't make one myself, because I don't know what to look for.
My favorites
Stack Overflow: This is a WIKI so it's not a rep point grab. I just really love the interface on this site. Been to too many crappy Q/A sites
Google Reader
MSDN: It's gotten a ton better in recent years and is a great way to grab little esoteric details about various APIs
iStockPhoto.com it's simple, effective and handles a large amount of information and data without getting bogged down. It also doesn't get in the way of the info you are looking for.
A good user interface fulfills a specific need of its users effectively.
As an example, here is a site (translation) that I have created for finding out what food is available in the cafeterias of the University of Helsinki. The typical use case is that when a student is hungry, he needs to know what food is available in the neighborhood student cafeterias (which are cheap for students), so that he can choose where to eat and what. He knows where each of those cafeterias is, but does not know what food they have today.
That site shows all the needed information at once. Because the students typically have a couple of cafeterias where they go, they can either bookmark the page with those cafeterias selected, or save the selection as a cookie. After that they can reach their goal without any navigation on the web site.
I don't use it on a day-to-day basis, but I'm very impressed with the Perseus Project digital library.
Here's a link to a poem from Catullus' Carmina in Latin as an example of the interface. Some features that I really like:
Click on the bar near the top to jump to any poem in the work. Larger chunks of the bar represent larger sections of the work (poems, chapters, however that particular work is logically broken up by the author).
Click on a Latin word in the poem to bring up a window (be patient; it seems to take a while) with lexicon entries, user voting and statistics on the word form (i.e. what the inflection means in the context of the sentence; it can be ambiguous in Latin) and so forth.
There are a number of resources down the right column, including various English translations, notes, references, etc. Any of them can be either shown in the right column, or swapped out with whatever is in the main content area in the center.
One of my personal favs: newspond.com
I'm a software developer who has a background in usability engineering. When I studied usability engineering in grad school, one of the professors had a mantra: "You are not the user". The idea was that we need to base UI design on actual user research rather than our own ideas as to how the UI should work.
Since then I've seen some good examples that seem to prove that I'm not the user.
User trying to use an e-mail template authoring tool, and gets stuck trying to enter the pipe (|) character. Problem turns out to be that the pipe on the keyboard has a space in the middle.
In a web app, user doesn't see content below the fold. Not unusual. We tell her to scroll down. She has no idea what we're talking about and is not familiar with the scroll thumb.
I'm listening in on a tech support call. Rep tells the user to close the browser. In the background I hear the Windows shutdown jingle.
What are some other good examples of this?
EDIT: To clarify, I'm looking for examples where developers make assumptions that turn out to be horribly false about what users will know, understand, etc.
I think one of the biggest examples is that expert users tend to play with an application.
They say, "Okay, I have this tool, what can I do with it?"
Your average user sees the ecosystem of an operating system, filesystem, or application as a big scary place where they are likely to get lost and never return.
For them, everything they want to do on a computer is task-based.
"How do I burn a DVD?"
"How do I upload a photo from my camera to this website."
"How do I send my mom a song?"
They want a starting point, a reproducible work flow, and they want to do that every time they have to perform the task. They don't care about streamlining the process or finding the best way to do it, they just want one reproducible way to do it.
In building web applications, I long since learned to make the start page of my application something separate from the menus with task-based links to the main things the application did in a really big font. For the average user, this increased usability hugely.
So remember this: users don't want to "use your application", they want to get something specific done.
In my mind, the most visible example of "developers are not the user" is the common Confirmation Dialog.
In most any document based application, from the most complex (MS Word, Excel, Visual Studio) through the simplest (Notepad, Crimson Editor, UltraEdit), when you close the appliction with unsaved changes you get a dialog like this:
The text in the Untitled file has changed.
Do you want to save the changes?
[Yes] [No] [Cancel]
Assumption: Users will read the dialog
Reality: With an average reading speed of 2 words per second, this would take 9 seconds. Many users won't read the dialog at all.
Observation: Many developers read much much faster than typical users
Assumption: The available options are all equally likely.
Reality: Most (>99%) of the time users will want their changes saved.
Assumption: Users will consider the consequences before clicking a choice
Reality: The true impact of the choice will occur to users a split second after pressing the button.
Assumption: Users will care about the message being displayed.
Reality: Users are focussed on the next task they need to complete, not on the "care and feeding" of their computer.
Assumption: Users will understand that the dialog contains critical information they need to know.
Reality: Users see the dialog as a speedbump in their way and just want to get rid of it in the fastest way possible.
I definitely agree with the bolded comments in Daniel's response--most real users frequently have a goal they want to get to, and just want to reach that goal as easily and quickly as possible. Speaking from experience, this goes not only for computer novices or non-techie people but also for fairly tech-savvy users who just might not be well-versed in your particular domain or technology stack.
Too frequently I've seen customers faced with a rich set of technologies, tools, utilities, APIs, etc. but no obvious way to accomplish their high-level tasks. Sometimes this could be addressed simply with better documentation (think comprehensive walk-throughs), sometimes with some high-level wizards built on top of command-line scripts/tools, and sometimes only with a fundamental re-prioritization of the software project.
With that said... to throw another concrete example on the pile, there's the Windows start menu (excerpt from an article on The Old New Thing blog):
Back in the early days, the taskbar
didn't have a Start button.
...
But one thing kept getting kicked up
by usability tests: People booted up
the computer and just sat there,
unsure what to do next.
That's when we decided to label the
System button "Start".
It says, "You dummy. Click here." And
it sent our usability numbers through
the roof, because all of a sudden,
people knew what to click when they
wanted to do something.
As mentioned by others here, we techie folks are used to playing around with an environment, clicking on everything that can be clicked on, poking around in all available menus, etc. Family members of mine who are afraid of their computers, however, are even more afraid that they'll click on something that will "erase" their data, so they'd prefer to be given clear directions on where to click.
Many years ago, in a CMS, I stupidly assumed that no one would ever try to create a directory with a leading space in the name .... someone did, and made many other parts of the system very very sad.
On another note, trying to explain to my mother to click the Start button to turn the computer off is just a world of pain.
How about the apocryphal tech support call about the user with the broken "cup holder" (CD/ROM)?
Actually, one that bit me was cut/paste -- I always trim my text inputs now since some of my users cut/paste text from emails, etc. and end up selecting extra whitespace. My tests never considered that people would "type" in extra characters.
Today's GUIs do a pretty good job of hiding the underlying OS. But the idosyncracies still show through.
Why won't the Mac let me create a folder called "Photos: Christmas 08"?
Why do I have to "eject" a mounted disk image?
Can't I convert a JPEG to TIFF just by changing the file extension?
(The last one actually happened to me some years ago. It took forever to figure out why the TIFF wasn't loading correctly! It was at that moment that I understood why Apple used to use embedded file types (as metadata) and to this day I do not understand why they foolishly went back to file extensions. Oh, right; it's because Unix is a superior OS.)
I've seen this plenty of times, it seems to be something that always comes up. I seem to be the kind of person who can pick up on these kind of assumptions (in some circumstances), but I've been blown away by what the user was doing other many times.
As I said, it's something I'm quite familiar with. Some of the software I've worked on is used by the general public (as opposed to specially trained people) so we had to be ready for this kind of thing. Yet I've seen it not be taken into account.
A good example is a web form that needs to be completed. We need this form completed, it's important to the process. The user is no good to us if they don't complete the form, but the more information we get out of them the better. Obviously these are two conflicting demands. If just present the user a screen of 150 fields (random large number) they'll run away scared.
These forms had been revised many times in order to improve things, but users weren't asked what they wanted. Decisions were made based on the assumptions or feelings of various people, but how close those feelings were to actual customers wasn't taken into account.
I'm also going to mention the corollary to Bevan's "The users will read the dialog" assumption. Operating off the "the users don't read anything" assumption makes much more sense. Yet people who argue that the user's don't read anything will often suggest putting bits of long dry explanatory text to help users who are confused by some random poor design decision (like using checkboxes for something that should be radio buttons because you can only select one).
Working any kind of tech support can be very informative on how users do (or do not) think.
pretty much anything at the O/S level in Linux is a good example, from the choice of names ("grep" obviously means "search" to the user!) to the choice of syntax ("rm *" is good for you!)
[i'm not hatin' on linux, it's just chock full of unix-legacy un-usability examples]
How about the desktop and wallpaper metaphors? It's getting better, but 5-10 years ago was the bane of a lot of remote tech support calls.
There's also the backslash vs. slash issue, the myriad names for the various keyboard symbols, and the antiquated print screen button.
Modern operating systems are great because they all support multiple user profiles, so everyone that uses my application on the same workstation can have their own settings and user data. Only, a good portion of the support requests I get are asking how to have multiple data files under the same user account.
Back in my college days, I used to train people on how to use a computer and the internet. I'd go to their house, setup their internet service show them email and everything. Well there was this old couple (late 60's). I spent about three hours showing them how to use their computer, made sure they could connect to the internet and everything. I leave feeling very happy.
That weekend I get a frantic call, about them not being able to check their email. Now I'm in the middle of enjoying my weekend but decide to help them out, and walk through all the things, 30 minutes latter, I ask them if they have two phone lines..."of course we only have one" Needless to say they forgot that they need to connect to the internet first (Yes this was back in the day of modems).
I supposed I should have setup shortcuts like DUN - > Check Email Step 1, Eduora - Check Email Step 2....
What users don't know, they will make up. They often work with an incorrect theory of how an application works.
Especially for data entry, users tend to type much faster than developers which can cause a problem if the program is slow to react.
Story: Once upon a time, before the personal computer, there was timesharing. A timesharing company's customer rep told me that once when he was giving a "how to" class to two or three nice older women, he told them how to stop a program that was running (in case it was started in error or taking to long.) He had one of the students type ^K, and the timesharing terminal responded "Killed!". The lady nearly had a heart attack.
One problem that we have at our company is employees who don't trust the computer. If you computerize a function that they do on paper, they will continue to do it on paper, while entering the results in the computer.