Someone just sent me a blog about 'ease of use' as a software evaluation criteria and frankly I felt physically ill.

Why? Because ease of use is an enormous gimick, ease of use is as real as the Loch Ness Monster - people have reported seeing it (Ya, ya, ya someone at my old company used "Siebel' and they said it was great - did everything for them), millions of dollars have been spent searching for Nessie (Gartner, Forrester, CapGemini, IDC, IBM Global Solutions, Trade Magazines report numerous case studies and 'favorable quadrant ' placement, scientists and experts from many fields continue to chase it.

Ease of use is inherently subjective. It's the user stupid. And frankly, software that looks easy to use and seems easy to set-up day one is not likely to 1. work in your environment without massive changes, data, integration, processes and... maybe cultural and managerial (yes, really). 2. deliver as much value beyond introduction stage when the user wants to make changes, skip steps ('too many screens,' repetitive tasks', 'not exactly as I want it', 'too many work arounds" 3. keep pace with changes in your business I have managed sales people and worked with sales engineers that can put on a song and dance and make any software operate like "Oz software," voice activated and it can do anything. ***There is no such software. Ironically, I have had sales teams that demo products from the inside-out because they are so concerned with proving that their proposed solution 'really works'.  Which approach do you think wins most often in  Sizzle versus Substance/proof? Sizzle wins. Sizzle wins because the substance presentation means a room full of people, with different needs and backgrounds, watching someone work. And the work is not familiar to them, nobody wants to step in, the audience gets distracted, bored, tuned out. Sizzle is entertaining and performed (yes, I said performed) well engages the audience and makes work look entertaining and interesting - a brighter future.Note - The presentations above are presenting the same software - so sellers should take note (and especially developers, entrepreneurs and techies).What this means for you as a buyer is that the interface and the 'ease of use' criteria should not be 'look and feel' or even 'fewer steps' but should be " will we get more work done, have confidence in the quality and output for the next three years and will users be able to get home at a reasonable hour and have a good night sleep knowing that the technology selected works as advertised IN YOUR ENVIRONMENT.