This is always a bone of contention. My commisserations to JFD and TIM, but sounds like you have crap hardware trying to work an old software = frustrations. I have installed and worked with good and bad, the fancier you want these things to look, generally the slower they get.
Shannon Aerospace took a long time to get their system up but once we had the system right and engineers conditioned to using it, they generally preferred it to scribing.
Line wise, I have worked at airlines who have live systems and as long as the input screens are kept simple, guys can get on with it. We used to keep the tech log page and the data entry screen the same format, but in many places they had a tech clerk to update it rather than waste an engineer's time/money. These linked systems that will not allow stores to send bits out until hours and **** updated are a good safety net, but can be hellish to work with
One set up in Brunei, not the national airline, was looking at a complete electronic tech log system...now that would be open to all kinds of abuse (chapter 99 being the most popular ata)
There are so many systems out there now, CX had a frigging committee looking at which one to buy (jollies for the boys more like). At the end of the day if you are trying run the system of your fading 286, youre gonna have problems.
------------------
Old age and treachery will always triumph over youth and enthusiasm.
[This message has been edited by Jango (edited 05 February 2001).]