Manuscript submission then and now

When I started in science, back in the dark ages, submitting a manuscript to a journal was still quite simple, if perhaps a bit inefficient:

1. Print the manuscript in triplicate.
   
2. Write a cover letter and print it.
   
3. Put everything into an envelope and send it off to the editor.

And that was that.

The first innovation was that you only had to send the manuscript to the editor as an eMail attachment, which was actually faster and saved a lot of paper. Unfortunately, however, things have changed again since then.

This is how it works today:

1. Log into the editorial management software of the journal of my choice. If I do not have an account with that journal yet, create one first.
   
2. Go to the author interface, click new submission.
   
3. Select the type of article.
   
4. Paste the title and abstract into an online form.
   
5. Select key words or topics that supposedly help the journal to assign editors and/or reviewers. Click 'save and continue'.
   
6. Upload main manuscript file, generally as an MS Word document.
   
7. Upload all the figures as separate files, generally as TIF or EPS, although JPGs may be acceptable at the review stage. Paste figure legends and write 'link texts' into the form fields.
   
8. Upload all the supplementary data files. If necessary, update the order of the files. Click 'save and continue'.
   
9. Next, the authorship page. As the corresponding author with an account at that journal I am already in, but I may be asked to link my ORCID. (I have no idea if anybody actually uses it for anything - I only ever look people up with their ResearcherID or Google Scholar.)
   
10. Search for my co-authors by name or eMail. I find the second co-author, great. The first and third co-authors aren't in the system, so I create entries for them. Click 'save and continue'.
    
11. Error: No telephone number provided for second co-author. But he was in the system, so you accepted him before! Also, will any editor really ever want to use it? Argh. Let's look up his number. Okay, edited. Click 'save and continue'.
    
12. Suggesting an editor for the manuscript. Oh dear, that's a long list. Hm. I know this guy hates one of the methods we used, he is out. This one is highly qualified but he will probably require us to add this other analysis that he likes. Ah well, worse things could happen. This one is also very qualified, but she works at a university I have a connection to - is that already a conflict of interest? Well, they can always choose somebody else, done.
    
13. Okay, suggesting peer reviewers and providing their contact information. This guy is an obvious choice as he is the expert for one of the analyses we used, but darn, he is currently between institutions. Let's google his name. No, that's outdated. This one too. Ah, I'm lucky: he has an updated CV on this third page I found, complete with the new phone number and eMail address. Okay, now for reviewer suggestion number two. She is another obvious choice as one of the world experts on our study group. Easy to find her information on a staff page, so that's good. Who else? Maybe two more experts on the study group? Ah yes, she would be interested in this, and I have her contact details. And then this other guy from Europe. Google. Darn, nothing, despite the unique name. Perhaps there is contact info on recent papers. No, he is too senior, the corresponding authors are always others. Ah, wait, here? No, an eMail address from 2012 going "director@institution.org" sounds fishy, most likely somebody else is director now. More Google. Ah, finally, was able to click myself through to a staff website, well hidden and not in English. Ye gods. Four qualified reviewers, that should be enough to get going. Click 'save and continue'.
    
14. Long, complicated page with miscellaneous information and declarations. First, write or upload cover letter. Done.
    
15. Next, declare that we have not submitted this manuscript elsewhere. Okay.
    
16. Is this a resubmission? No.
    
17. Declare that we have followed protocol so-and-so on ethical collection practices. Yes.
    
18. Declare that we have added a section on data availability. Wait, was that in the instructions to authors? Don't remember that. Argh. Save. Open manuscript file. Add data availability section. Back to file upload. Delete manuscript file. Re-upload manuscript file. Reorder files. Click 'save and continue'. Back to declaration. Yes, we now have a section on data availability.
    
19. Declare no conflicts of interest. Okay. Click 'save and continue'.
    
20. Large summary page. Check everything I entered so far. Down at the bottom: have to check PDF proofs before being allowed to submit. Click button, wait while the editorial manager bundles everything into a PDF.
    
21. Open PDF. One of the EPS figures does not display. Argh. Argh. Argh. Back to file upload. Delete offending figure. Re-upload figure - as a TIF this time, that should be foolproof. Reorder files. Click 'save and continue'. Back to summary page.
    
22. Re-check everything I entered so far. Click button, wait while the editorial manager generates a new PDF. Looks good this time.
    
23. The big moment is there: click here to submit. "Are you certain? This will submit your manuscript." Yes!

Yay, progress?