I have no experience with touch-screens or trackballs, so everything I say
should be taken with a grain or two of salt.  But here goes...

I don't think touch screens are completely maintenance-free.  I recall a
seminar on the pros and cons of different technologies which noted that
screens get dirty over time, what with all that touching, and the dirt
interferes with the light-grid which locates the visitor's finger.

Also, there is a tendency amongst us humans to react angrily to machines
that respond slowly or in ways we did not expect.  We've all been guilty of
pressing elevator buttons too often or too hard when we're in a hurry.  I
wouldn't be surprised if touch-screen monitors came in for a similar beating.

On the other hand, I feel K. Williams' faith in trackballs is a little too
extreme.  While they are common, they are certainly not ubiquitous.  Most
people do *not* use computers at their jobs; most people do *not* own home
computers; many schools do *not* have computers.  For that matter, many
people do not have jobs; many people cannot afford computers.  These are our
audience, too.  Many people are over 35; these are our audience.

In general, I would agree the touch-screen seems more "natural."  But I
think one needs to examine on a case-by-case basis what works best for the
exhibit at hand, what best gets your point across.  It may not even *be* a
computer.




Eugene Dillenburg
Geology Department
The Field Museum                                FAX: 312-922-9566
Roosevelt Road at Lake Shore Dr.                phone: 312-922-9410 ext. 293
Chicago, Illinois  60605

"Never pay more than minimum wage for a shirt."

                                        -- Bruce Elliott