Grateful for Navigator, because WorldShare S*CKS

I'm personally grateful the State of Texas is having all of us Public Libraries currently on OCLC First Search transition to the Navigator system for ILL.  Near as I can tell, Navigator will actually supersede OCLC WorldShare, which is scheduled to roll-out and replace OCLC First Search by December 31st of 2013.  I have tried to use OCLC WorldShare but OMG, I hate this interface so much.  It's SO DAMN SLOW and sluggish.  It takes forever to load in between actions.  I hate not being able to mass-printout new requests without having to go through them individually one at a time.  In so many ways WorldShare is a step BACKWARDS in terms of staff functionality.  I'm sure it does some important new & good things as well, but as an experienced First Search user, what stands out to me are what WorldShare handles more poorly than First Search.  I just can't get past these things, and not for lack of trying either.

We've not had a chance to beta-test a live version of Navigator, but from the simulations we've done in training, the interface seems much more user friendly and logical than WorldShare at least.  So day to day I've given up trying to use/learn WorldShare, since Navigator seems to make WorldShare moot after its own implementation by the State of Texas.  I feel sorry for non-Texas libraries who will be under WorldShare's yoke after 31 December of 2013, though.

For now, OCLC First Search still works swimmingly well so that's what I'm sticking with for daily ILL requests until Navigator comes online officially.  WorldShare to me is mainly a waste of time---far, far less efficient than First Search.  I can't begin to explain WHY that's the case, only that as a practical matter in day to day operations, it IS emphatically the case.  It's not merely a case of my being familiar with First Search and less familiar with WorldShare.  I've genuinely tried to make WorldShare work for me, on several occasions, as has my co-worker.  We're both equally frustrated by its sluggishness and clunkyness.  Perhaps another case of the computer scientists designing library software without querying actual library staff before developing it?  So it would seem, at any rate.