| I work in the control room for an electrical generation system an this isn't the case at all for us. Each desk has 12 ~30 inch monitors, and each monitor has a similar degree of information density, from monitors of system frequency, voltages, power flows etc. around the network, also financial / market information. There's a mix of diagrams, tabular data, maps, plots. Two of the monitors are devoted to a geographic view with weather data, locations of field staff etc. Check out the similar setup from this California control room:
https://www.bizjournals.com/sacramento/news/2016/06/17/calif... Most displays show live data, but are not setup to be interacted with normally. I think the truth is probably due to:
1) the same with all enterprise software, the folks who end up using the displays have token-to-no input into the purchasing or design decisions. Actually now I think of it, check out the interfaces marketed to electronic music composers (generally individuals or small studios):
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GOq8R55xMyo 2) While I bet operators would select Tronish UI given the choice, they don't _need_ it because ultimately (with enough experience) the model of the system sits in your head, and the interface simply gives cues. |
This is a huge part of any interface that's heavily used. Once you're used to it, the interface is invisible; information is automatically parsed into a mental model, and commands are issued with minimal conscious awareness of actual keys pressed and clicks made. This is also why Emacs and vim users regard their editor as intuitive or good UI:)