Balmori Software Inc.

When evaluating a software application, it's helpful to keep in mind the cautionary tale of the man who married the gorgeous girl for her looks, then found out afterward that there was insanity in her family.

What you see is not necessarily what you get. Whether sizing up a potential spouse or a software solution for your business, it's prudent to have the following mental model: there's a world of difference between (a) the user interface, and (b) the underlying algorithms.

The user interface (UI) is what you see on screen. It's how you, the user, interact with the software. It's how you are able to input data, and it's how you extract the application's outputs (reports).

The underlying algorithms, you don't see. These are the formulas, the actual number-crunching rules, by which the data that you input through the user interface get computed and processed. They're what happen after you input your raw data. The algorithms are the main thing you're paying for in a piece of software.

Let's get straight to the point: it is far, far easier to make a pretty user interface than a robust algorithm.

Designing a user interface is a question of esthetics, taste, graphic design, ergonomics. These are serious, worthwhile concerns; and no doubt a well-designed UI is a lot of fun for the users. Just like a good-looking girl can be a lot of fun at first - even if she has mental health issues.

But if the software gives you wrong results, or erratic results, or starts behaving unpredictably, then the prettiest UI in the world is for naught. When Miss Crazy Gorgeous starts manifesting her crazy, you're going to think she's not so gorgeous after all.

In plain terms, pretty graphics aren't central to the creation of useful business software. A text-based application, even with plain-Jane graphics, continues to be very useful even in the era of GUI; just ask any Linux or bank CASA application user.

But algorithms, that's a different story. Very different story. Have you ever been shown impressive, professional-looking menus and input screens, which all went for naught when the application simply couldn't produce the expected reports during the demo? Or whose Accounts Receivable balances didn't jibe with the Customer Ledger? Or had a spotty audit trail? Or had no audit trail at all?

That was an application with a nice facade but weak or sloppy underlying algorithms.

And that, in turn, is because solid algorithms are far harder to create than pretty screens.

Flor Katipunan, MIS Manager at a major government corporation, has a common-sense test for vendors who try to bowl her over with impressive graphics. Mindful that the success or failure of the software choice directly affects her working life for the next few years - not to mention her career and professional reputation - she simply asks to see printouts of the reports that she's seeking.

That quiet request puts any graphical razzle-dazzle into proper perspective. When she utters that requirement, the discussion swerves back to the real issue, which is: underneath the impressive coat of many colors, does this app solve my problem? rsr

<<< Back to top >>>