I plug my HTC Desire into my MacBook Pro, and this happens:
That’s very pretty, isn’t it? I can just imagine my father thinking, “What in the hell do I do now?”
This is the kind of dialog – and the kind of design decision – that only a geek could love.
There’s no problem with Android, per se. Android is an OS. You can build whatever UI you choose on top of that OS. HTC has chosen to develop SenseUI as a ’skin’ over Android, to provide it with user accessibility. As you can see, they clearly knocked it out of the park with this one. Because every user will be thoroughly knowledgeable, understanding the subtle differences between ‘HTC Sync’, ‘Disk drive’ and ‘Internet sharing’. Yeah, absolutely.
Absolute bollocks. The user should never have to tell the device how it’s to be used. The device should figure that out because it’s being used that way. If you can’t do that, then you’re not listening to the user, and if you’re not listening to the user, you probably shouldn’t be allowed to make mobile phones.
Wait. I suddenly sounded like Steve Jobs for a moment there, didn’t I? Well, fair enough. Because this argument concerns him. I’m beginning to see the wisdom of Apple’s design fascism. There is something to be said for a single eye looking out over all of Mordor and controlling every thing that happens in the cracked valleys below… (Oh, wait, that’s another fairy tale.) There’s something to be said about putting the user experience first and foremost. That user experience should be so seamless as to be invisible. Nothing less than that is acceptable.
Does this mean you steal techniques from Apple? Damn straight it does. If you’re not prepared to learn from your enemies, you don’t deserve to win the game. Plug the device in. Launch an app to manage the device – something that looks an awful lot like iTunes – but has the advantage of an open architecture, so all of your content partners can provide their own plug-ins. The consumer plugs their mobile into the computer, and everything else just happens.
There, that wasn’t too hard, was it? Amateurs.
What an interesting perspective.. I’m so used to Android prompting me when I connect the usb cable that I didn’t really notice this screen much less pay any heed to the ux angle. There’s no reason for HTC to need to ask this. There’s no reason why it can’t be assumed. Prompting every time is just pointless and destined to confuse users not acquainted with Android. Ux fail.
Comment by Chris Rowland — May 22, 2010 @ 10:54 am
Ironically, yours and @karalee_’s tweets came up one after the other. See here: http://justanotherprblog.com/b1/?p=1193
I know who you are, and your TV persona, reputation etc. but I have to disagree.
What Android is offering you here is “choice”. It’s mysterious isn’t it? Not allowing you to be a stupid automaton. Making you make a decision. Feeling human?
Stop using Apple products, they rot your braqin.
Comment by Alex — May 22, 2010 @ 11:01 am
I’m not so sure. *Disabling* tethering with an iPhone is hard. On windows at least you need to go into network connections management and disable the network interface. And that, of course was after I had to frig around to get tethering to work in the first place.
Pushing phone settings into an iTunes like app is the last thing we need. A phone shouldn’t be reliant on a computer for config.
Yes, I’m on the geek end of the spectrum, buta relatively clear ’set once’ prompt like that is exactly what I wish my iPhone would do
Comment by Ben Hughes — May 22, 2010 @ 11:07 am
Yeah, I find this feature particularly grating as well. My experience with HTC’s Sync software was that, well, it’s a little empty – I felt that as far as a tool to interact with the phone went that it could have been so much more.
Comment by Moist — May 22, 2010 @ 11:07 am
It’s not an Android design issue, it’s a HTC one. The HTC Touch Pro 2, which runs Sense UI on windows mobile, has an almost identical screen when you connect it to a PC via USB.
I agree with your point though Mark, for the non-technical user this is an awful screen. Even worse, I can imagine someone selecting ‘Charge Only’ and ‘Don’t ask again’ and then being confused later when they can’t sync their phone to their PC.
Comment by Dave Gaukroger — May 22, 2010 @ 11:11 am
Choice is when you can go into a settings menu to decide the nature of your USB connection. It is not choice when you are confronted with a dialog. A dialog is a demand. That’s very different, both from a design point of view, and from a user psychology point of you. The job of the designer is to treat the user with a great deal of care and parenting. In most cases decisions are not necessary and should not be presented.
Is this infantilizing to the user? Yes. And I’m alright with that.
Comment by admin — May 22, 2010 @ 11:21 am
Disabling tethering is Settings -> General -> Network Connections -> Tethering. That should do it, shouldn’t it? It does for my MacBook Pro.
And I agree that a computer shouldn’t be needed, and hasn’t been, so far for my HTC Desire. But when the user wants to put music onto their phone, having them mount it as a drive and then copy the files over is not an acceptable solution. Not at all.
Comment by admin — May 22, 2010 @ 11:25 am
@Dave – I did attribute all of this design fail to Sense UI, didn’t I? Because I know it’s not Android. Android is just an OS.
Comment by admin — May 22, 2010 @ 11:25 am
I learnt a while ago to embrace iTunes and not to fight it. I used to think it was important what my files were called and where they were. Now, I let the app look after it. If only it were less bloaty.
Connecting a cable should be cleverer. Why can’t it be all the above things? You mean it can’t charge *and* sync at the same time?
Comment by Nigel Wadsworth — May 22, 2010 @ 11:27 am
Point taken that the wording on this dialog is a little too “geeky”, but in terms of UX how would you prefer a mobile device present the connection options to do one of these very different things? It could not “know” what you wanted each and every time.
If you were out and about and wanted to tether, then you would select the “share” option. How would the device know this? You may have been at home in the living room wanting to copy photos from the phone or music to the phone…how would it know that either?
The whole point of an open architecture is that the device should present itself in a standards compliant way which would automatically preempt the launch of the appropriate application on the attached computer (and be OS independant). So I disagree that I should have to launch an app on my computer to interact with the device, it should launch automatically dependant on the selected mode.
Scenario…The phone should be able to connect to a Windows, Mac, Linux, BeOS machine and then via mode selection the computer would recieve a signal of connection via the USB bus and automagically fire up the appropriate application (file browser, LAN connection sharing…)
So yes the wording needs improvement, but I personally feel that the mode of connection should be offered as an option each time (and defaulted to charge only).
My 2 cents..
Cheers,
PS I am, overall, not a fan of what HTC and Sense have to offer over and above the default Android UI/UX…and this does play some part in my feelings toward the Desire.
Comment by Michael Manning — May 22, 2010 @ 11:31 am
@Michael – I disagree with your assertion. The phone / connected software should be able to negotiate behavior based on user activity. The fact that an iPhone can do this is proof enough. And iPhone does this specifically because a design decision was made that the user should not be concerned with this functionality, unless the user specifically wants to be concerned with this functionality.
I won’t be drawn into a ‘how would I do it differently?’ conversation, because that conversation could only be constructively done by breaking the system down into core user experience elements and building it back up again, doing it correctly this time.
Comment by admin — May 22, 2010 @ 11:41 am
Well, then you’d have a tweaked iPhone wouldn’t you?
Comment by Nigel Wadsworth — May 22, 2010 @ 11:44 am
I agree with the comment…
“the user should not be concerned with this functionality, unless the user specifically wants to be concerned with this functionality.”
…and that’s where the default android operation is to charge the battery and then present options in the notification area, where if you so desire (no pun intended;)) you can initiate some other function.
Again HTC adding something which I believe detracts from UX.
Comment by Michael Manning — May 22, 2010 @ 12:23 pm
Let me weigh in as a non-geek. I haven’t seen that screen yet as I haven’t yet tried plugging my phone into my Mac.
The only reason I would be connecting these two devices is for downloading photos onto the computer or uploading music onto the phone. There is no option there that tells me that this is even possible. I don’t need to sync contacts as the phone can do this without a usb connection; it isn’t a drive, it’s a phone and I don’t know what mounting is if it doesn’t involve a horse or a bike; and I don’t need to share the internet because both devices have that independently connected.
Using my powers of deduction, I’d guess the answer would be to mount it as a drive. Am I right? Now this took me a reasonable amount of thought. It shouldn’t have to. And there are many people out there less savvy than me. If these phones are meant to reach a broader market, then non-geeks need to be taken into account.
KISS principle is what is required here. It doesn’t need to be dumped down, just made simpler. There is a difference.
Comment by Helen Perris — May 22, 2010 @ 2:39 pm
[...] And clearly, I’m not alone – although Mark Pesce’s beef takes a broader view here. Connect the Desire via USB to your computer and when prompted, select ‘Disk Drive’ as [...]
Pingback by HTC Desire: Photos to PC undesirable | Stuff I'm not qualified to say — May 22, 2010 @ 3:08 pm
Re disabling tethering: I should have been more clear. I connect my iphone to many PCs: work PC; home laptop; home media centre PC; eeepc. I want tethering on for one, maybe two of those. I definitely don’t want it for my work PC, and it doesn’t serve a purpose on most of the others. I need to manually disable it on each PC I don’t want it on.
I’d much prefer “what do you want to do” dialog. But it seems that’s just me.
Comment by Ben Hughes — May 23, 2010 @ 12:13 pm
Auto-correct FTL.
That should have read “dumbed down” above.
Comment by Helen Perris — May 23, 2010 @ 1:45 pm
[...] I’ve said this before on Mark’s blog, but I’ll say it again here: If this phone is to be marketed more broadly, then it must be usable by the broader market, ie business and general consumers. It doesn’t need to be dumbed down, as some geeks seem to fear (and reject), it just needs to be made more simple, more intuitive and less complex. There can always be advanced options for power users. The KISS principle is a wonderful thing. It should be used here. [...]
Pingback by Why does this have to be so hard? — May 24, 2010 @ 1:21 pm
I can’t believe you’re complaining about having an option to decide how your phone should interact with your PC.
No, the titles aren’t particularly helpful, but the descriptions are – they say exactly what that function is for.
Of course you don’t have the same options for iPhone, but that’s because Apple doesn’t want you to have those options…it wants to keep you safely in your little sandbox. USB connection to access files? Not a chance.
If you have such any issue with it, tick the box that tells it not to ask you again.
Oh, and by the way…that IS an Android screen, and is found in all Android 2.1 devices.
Comment by Tim — May 26, 2010 @ 4:00 am
@Tim – Choice has approximately nothing to do with user experience.
That it is an Android screen only depresses me, and continues to demonstrate that Android is Not Ready For Prime Time.
Comment by admin — May 26, 2010 @ 4:34 am
I know this post is long superseded, but I had a chat to some friends about your complaint and came to a greater understanding of why this screen exists. I thought I’d share it with you.
The four choices presented to you are all pretty self-explanatory, and there’s a reason that all four are needed. Here’s what you can choose:
1. Charge only: this means that the device should not attempt to sync or share information with another computer. That’s potentially important for a phone, which contains a lot of personal information, and a good choice to have if you’re security conscious.
The iPhone doesn’t have this option, because it’s specifically locked out of syncing with anything but iTunes.
2. HTC sync – allows a connected PC to access the phone’s data to sync the items you choose. This also allows charging, and is similar to what iPhone does when you plug it in.
3. Disk drive – allows read/write access to your phone’s memory card and use it as a flash drive – a very useful function that most modern phones allow. It’s important to note that the memory card has to be “disconnected” from the phone to allow it to be mounted as a disk drive. iPhone specifically forbids this functionality to maintain the iTunes-only sync.
4. Internet sharing – permits the phone’s internet connection to be used by the connected PC. iPhone allows this while connected via iTunes.
It seems that the basis of your complaint is that you don’t really WANT options – you just want the phone to do “just work” without asking questions. The problem is that some of these actions are mutually exclusive – for instance, you can’t sync your data and mount the drive at the same time. So the phone asks what you want, and then does your bidding…and offers “set and forget” for those who don’t like prompts.
Apple’s iPhone OS has done a great job of raising the expectations of smartphone users in terms of intuitive interfaces and simplifying user experiences, and there’s a lot to commend. However, some of the device’s functionality has been lost through over-simplification or, even worse, in the name of making a profit. Yes, it’s a very easy device to use while you are doing things Apple’s way. But Apple’s way is not always in the consumer’s interests and is often designed to prop up Apple’s business model and maintain dependance Apple’s software. The popularity of jailbreaking just proves that Apple’s way is not always what the consumer wants.
I agree that the USB connection screen could be improved. They could have used less technical wording, since “mounting as disk drive” isn’t common language. They also could have used icons (a power plug for Option 1, a flash drive for Option 3) to make the options easier to distinguish from each other. They could also have dumbed it down by removing some of the options, but I’m glad they didn’t. Giving less options is not Android’s way of doing things…they empower users to choose the functionality they want, not restrict them to a single, compulsory software point of contact.
So I’m going to have to disagree with your conclusion – choice has a LOT to do with user experience. The less functionality a device offers, the fewer choices you need to make. Conversely, the more options you have, the more often you need to choose your outcome.
Comment by Tim — May 31, 2010 @ 10:01 am
@Tim – You’re explaining these options to me as if I were some sort of simpleton, rather than someone who has been using computers daily for, let’s see…thirty years.
I know what the options mean. That’s not the point. My father does not. Helen Perris did not. These are the normal, average users of the Desire.
There should be no USB connection screen. Period. You see things differently, fine. You can have that kind of user experience. I want a seamless user experience. I want a handset that can figure out when it should be mounted as a drive or not. And will do it as needed, and invisibly. Things like that.
Is that hard? Hardly. But it means designing from the user’s experience, not from the device’s. And that’s a bridge that Android has yet to cross.
Comment by admin — May 31, 2010 @ 10:14 am
Mark, I think you’re wishing for the impossible.
You say you want a phone that can figure out when it needs to mount the phone’s memory as a disk drive. A phone cannot know the difference between when you want to sync and when you want to mount the memory card as a drive, unless you tell it. It cannot do both…they’re mutually exclusive functions.
By the same token, you want a phone that “knows” when you do and don’t want to share information with your computer, rather than just using the USB cord as a charger. It’s either allowing access or not, and it can’t know which to choose unless you tell it.
If you can show me a single platform that just “knows” how to do either of these things, I would be very interested to see it. The only way I can see it happening is if you had Android software installed on each and every PC you connect to….oh wait, that’s what Apple does, and it’s a BAD solution.
Your original post suggested that Android should copy the iTunes method. The reason iTunes sync is simple is because it’s locked down and totally lacking in options, and one of the main reasons I continue avoiding Apple’s products. It doesn’t allow disk mounting, and it doesn’t give the option to NOT connect at all – both options that are welcome in both Android and iPhone jailbreak communities. The reason for not allowing these options is simple – they’re sacrificed for the sake of seamless simplicity and more importantly, Apple’s bottom line.
User experience isn’t just about ease of use – it’s also about giving users what they want. Sometimes that means adding complexity (if you can call a prompt screen complexity). Can’t figure it out? Read the manual, that’s what it’s there for!
You want total simplicity above all else? Stick with Apple – they’ll keep you safe in your comfortable little cell where you never need to think, or worry about anything except keeping your iTunes account topped up. Apple’s products are great for simpletons.
Me, I’ll take the odd prompt screen over lost functionality every time.
Comment by Tim — June 1, 2010 @ 4:47 am
@Tim – Thank you for your illuminating contribution to this discussion. I see things much more clearly as a result.
Comment by admin — June 1, 2010 @ 4:53 am
@Tim – On further reflection, I’ve decided that I really do need to reply.
1) I’ve probably been programming computers longer than you’ve been alive. So kindly make no assumptions about what I do and do not know about how computers in general, and USB in particular, works. You are just plain wrong on this point.
2) You are proof positive that geeks should not be let near the user interface. Give them a command line, pat them on the heads, and send them on their merry little ways. But under no circumstance do you let them drive experience or interface issues. I suspect you resent this. But it is the only thing holding the line between civilization and utter chaos.
3) iTunes is not simple because it is locked down. It is locked down because it is locked down. It is simple because Apple took a few years to think through the design issues. These are two separate things entirely. Apple could, if it so chose, completely open up iTunes to plugins and all sorts of fun things that 3rd parties could use to make the platform sing. Apple chooses not to. Fair enough. But to say ‘this is this because that is that’ indicates that you misunderstand these issues.
4) Do I want simplicity? No. But my father does. And Helen Perris does. And they represent 95% of the user base for any technology product. They want something that just works. You, it seems, just wants something that gets in your way. To each his own.
Comment by admin — June 1, 2010 @ 6:06 am
@Tim – Please read my comment above to get some perspective. The whole world doesn’t think like you nor want what you want.
Comment by Helen Perris — June 1, 2010 @ 6:18 am
@Mark
I think Apple’s reason for point 3 is they they don’t want to HAVE to support other 3rd parties and it makes it a whole lot simpler for them; whilst giving them complete control. Which, at the end of the day is what Apple wants. They want to create easy seamless integration for all their products, great! But in deciding to do so, they have to lock down their platform. They are mutually exclusive in this manner.
<3 choice. </3 closed. <3 openness. </3 proprietary.
Comment by Ben — June 1, 2010 @ 6:22 am
@Ben – If what you say were the case, there would be no apps on iPhone/iPad. Instead we have a flourishing – if closed – ecology. Apple could control things well and still present a great UX. They wouldn’t have to let every developer in, just the ones which improved the UX.
Comment by admin — June 1, 2010 @ 6:31 am
Mark,
Interestingly we got a very welcome gift of a HTC Touch Pro to replace a damaged Nokia recently.
That device has a similar screen when you connect it to the computer as the screen you share in your post.
I knew what they said, but maybe I’ve been Appledumbed over the last 11 months of using an iPhone. I couldn’t decide how it was going to allow me to try and Sync my wifes contacts to the Phone.
With my previous iPod connecting the device to the computer;
- mounted it as a hard drive
- synced the contacts
- synced the music
on connection, unless I had disabled each option.
With the iPhone it;
- syncs the contacts
- syncs the music
on connection, unless I disable each option (which I do).
And, if tethering was enabled ON THE DEVICE
enabled connection to the internet.
No questions required. So what if it is controlled by iTunes. I know it is BPOS in many cases, and wish it wouldn’t back the ENTIRE phone up EVERY TIME it connects, but it’s a bit simpler, and therefore more effective.
Of course, I’m Appledumbed, so YMMV
franksting
Comment by franksting — June 1, 2010 @ 6:32 am
Mark, Tim
I am not a geek but not a complete luddite either but your discussion raises some questions for me. Tim, you state syncing and mounting as a disk are mutually exclusive? Why? What if I want to sync my contact and transfer some music? Can I do that? Do I need to unplug and reconnect?
Having to make this choice every time would annoy me, I just want to connect my phone to my PC and do ‘stuff’ I may change my mind part way though this? How do does this make for a good user experience?
I would like to hear both of your opinions on this.
Comment by Rupert — June 1, 2010 @ 6:37 am
As a user, and as a writer and dreamer, I want to switch something on and have it do what I need it to… in much the same way as I could pick up a pen and write. I don’t want technical hassles… I know the basics of using a computer and can, over time, adapt.
But I have experienced situations where I had an idea and wanted to write it or paint it on my screen, but didn’t because the software for whatever reason, wouldn’t allow me to do what I wanted, and I’d be there for half an hour or more trying desperately to get the thing to do what I wanted.
I dream of something that I can just hold in my hand and it’ll come on and do what is required, I visualise a computer that looks like a marble, has no keyboard or screen, We won’t need to program it or use expensive programs, and communication is completely free… and I think we’ll get there.
OK, that’s the distant future, but I feel things are getting better.
In the 80’s, a computer was almost always a fairly useless toy in our homes, or something owned by nerds. but now they’re as useful as any other appliance in our homes, and certainly a lot easier to use.
But we have a long way to go.
Comment by Wolfie Rankin — June 1, 2010 @ 6:40 am
@Mark,
I meant they they only expose enough that suits them, and then if someone intrudes onto one of their products they remove it from the App store. Sure.. Makes sense; they are a business after all.. *cough*
Comment by Ben — June 1, 2010 @ 6:42 am
@franksting
you just hit the nail on the head. You described all the reasons as to why I don’t own a single Apple product. Life is so much simpler without Apple
Comment by Ben — June 1, 2010 @ 6:44 am
@Ben – Don’t get me wrong. I am not trying to be an Apple apologist. Right now their strategy seems to be equal parts preserving UX, preserving the business, and being unfathomably evil.
Comment by admin — June 1, 2010 @ 6:46 am
Tim: Mark: What a mountain out of a mole-hill!
Mark: Quite frankly you’re wrong here, I know it’s a long read, but please take the time to seriously read and understand this.
Tim: You’ve missed a couple of Mark’s points, and you’ve not truly understood his position. You have valid points, but take this far too seriously for your own good. (like me, but hey the first step is recognizing the problem.)
I’ll start at the beginning, the article in question:
It does have simplicity, The options are simple, bold and clear, with a simple further explanation. These do not look like they’ve been written by a “Geek” but by someone balancing all the different target audiences of the device.
Note, for example, that the explanations are not even accurate! There’s no “Disks” anywhere in the desire, the entire term “Disk Drive” is a simplification aimed at the less technical users. Seriously, if my mother can understand what a “Disk Drive” means, then that’s simple enough!
Secondly, if it is all too confusing, the device takes a simple and safe choice automatically and seamlessly! There’s no need to press anything, the Desire performs exactly as you stated you wanted? Why was this post even typed in the first place, the device ALREADY DOES WHAT YOU WANTED IT TO, you are complaining about it doing what you want it to do!
Leave the phone alone for a few seconds and the message disappears leaving the phone in the safest and most beneficial state, the most likely to be used most often – Charge Only. (If you want simplicity, then this is the only option you’ll use.)
“Charge Only” is the default unless you’ve been playing around in the advanced settings or chosen something else previously. (And if this screen worries you, then you’ll run screaming from the advanced settings.)
If you do want another default when you plug the device in, then you are obviously technically adept enough to understand what the options are, and asking you to select the new default, once in the life of the phone, is not a big ask by any stretch of the imagination. (Especially as you can change your mind latter if you so choose.)
The wording and actions have been thought through, and quite well IMHO. This combines the best of all worlds as good as possible, far better than Apple or anyone else. I firmly believe that if anyone is better at UI design than Apple, it’s Google.
(Google do a better job in my opinion, as they don’t just cater for the novice users exclusively, they assume some users have a brain and want to use it.)
In conclusion, my opinion, is that technical people (As you’ve stated, you’ve been a programmer for a long time, indicating you think of yourself as highly technical) should not make assumptions about what non-technical people’s want. Because you are so technically minded, you simply are not equipped to think like a non-technical person. This is where good UI designers should be employed, and the “Geeks” like yourself should leave them to it. (They simply understand it better than you do.)
Stop, take a step back and really look and think about what you’re saying in this article. – You really sound to me like the Disabilities Inspector that asked for the Multimedia subtitles to work with Text-To-Speech software!
(http://thedailywtf.com/Articles/Infinitely-Recursive-Accessibility.aspx)
/rant… (Mark, you have my E-Mail if you want a longer discussion.)
Comment by Glenn Stephens — June 1, 2010 @ 7:08 am
@Glenn – Wow. What a nice rant. Especially all of the apologetics you get into viz the USB interface screen, which I reiterate should not be there in the first place, so all of your acrobatics are as for naught. Its presence is the mistake, the category error, the misapprehension of the market for the device. Mistaking functionality for usability. They are not the same thing.
Choice is nearly always confusing to the user, and should be avoided at all costs. Android made a mistake on the very first try. Which means they need some more schooling. May I suggest Apple’s “Human Interface Guidelines”? Which is still great reading, nearly 30 years after it was first published.
I guess the problem is really this: the UX on Android is made of fail. It wll have to be rebuilt from the ground up so that mistakes like this simply can’t be made in the future.
I don’t know what’s so hard to understand about this, or why it’s driving everyone into a frenzy.
Comment by admin — June 1, 2010 @ 7:30 am
>Mark, I think you’re wishing for the impossible.
He’s not.
>You say you want a phone that can figure out when it needs to mount the phone’s memory as a disk drive. A phone cannot know the difference between when you want to sync and when you want to mount the memory card as a drive, unless you tell it. It cannot do both…they’re mutually exclusive functions.
They are only mutually exclusive because of a design choice. The designers chose to implement the file sharing by exposing the memory card as a USB Mass Storage device. This is great for platform independence but rubbish for UX. What about a daemon that ran on the phone when USB was connected to handle file transfers? We can do this over Ethernet why not over USB?
If you still wanted that platform independence option, stick it in a menu or in the notification area.
>By the same token, you want a phone that “knows” when you do and don’t want to share information with your computer, rather than just using the USB cord as a charger. It’s either allowing access or not, and it can’t know which to choose unless you tell it.
You do not need to transfer data to charge the phone. You just need to transfer electrons. You don’t need to tell it to start changing now, an opamp on the MB should know when there’s volts going in.
Why not let the same daemon that’s listening for file transfers also listen for PIM syncing? You could run a 2nd daemon if you needed too.
>If you can show me a single platform that just “knows” how to do either of these things, I would be very interested to see it. The only way I can see it happening is if you had Android software installed on each and every PC you connect to….oh wait, that’s what Apple does, and it’s a BAD solution.
SyncML – It’s what’s for breakfast.
While your at it; explain why Apple’s solution is BAD rather than just telling us it is.
>Your original post suggested that Android should copy the iTunes method. The reason iTunes sync is simple is because it’s locked down and totally lacking in options, and one of the main reasons I continue avoiding Apple’s products. It doesn’t allow disk mounting, and it doesn’t give the option to NOT connect at all – both options that are welcome in both Android and iPhone jailbreak communities. The reason for not allowing these options is simple – they’re sacrificed for the sake of seamless simplicity and more importantly, Apple’s bottom line.
iTunes sync is simple because it’s designed to be simple.
If Android used a SyncML daemon for PIM and File management there could be an option in the phone to say – don’t run SyncML when USB is connected, instead ‘ask me’ or ‘umount the memory stick in the Android and expose it as a USB Mass Storage Device’. The default option should be the simplest for the user which does not include a blocking dialog, that may not be seen, which needs attention before anything can happen. I always forget to tell my phone (n95) what mode I want it in when I connect the USB cable and I know that I’m supposed to do that.
The point is, it can be done within standards based protocols. They might not be mature and robust but it’s not nearly as impossible as you try to make it sound.
>User experience isn’t just about ease of use – it’s also about giving users what they want. Sometimes that means adding complexity (if you can call a prompt screen complexity). Can’t figure it out? Read the manual, that’s what it’s there for!
I don’t think user experience means what you think it means. Users want to complete tasks, they don’t want to work out whether that means they need to “Mount as disk drive”. I know what that means; users don’t.
Do you realise that each of the items in the list take away your options? Charge only – No Syncing, file transfers or internet sharing for you! HTC Sync – maybe charging, maybe file transfers, probably not internet sharing. Internet sharing – no syncing or file transfers.
Blue Tooth does this really well with it’s channeling system. Dial up networking goes on one channel, file transfers go on another and PIM operations go on a third channel. Why can’t this be done over USB? This could be hacked together with a virtual USB hub but that’s kinda nasty so a better option would be developing a standard that allows for multiple communications channels, controlled by software routers, to use USB for its layer1.
Then, as an option on the phones ‘advanced connections’ screen (which you get a non-blocking notification of and is also documented in TFM), “stop running that crazy new protocol that just works on systems that can use it and give me my old school DUN modem or USB mass storage device”. Choice! Yay!
>You want total simplicity above all else? Stick with Apple – they’ll keep you safe in your comfortable little cell where you never need to think, or worry about anything except keeping your iTunes account topped up. Apple’s products are great for simpletons.
Nice straw man, jerk.
>Me, I’ll take the odd prompt screen over lost functionality every time.
Which is why you’re not a UX designer.
Comment by Adam — June 1, 2010 @ 7:38 am
The right UX is a function of the audience who uses it.
There is no single interface concept that is ‘usable’ to all audiences.
The question is, does the Android UX in HTC Desire match the audience it is aimed at.
If Telstra is marketing this phone at the the mass market, then we might all agree it’s not the right audience and Mark’s criticisms are fully valid.
I would not recommend an HTC Desire to my non-technical family, and for similar reasons I specifically wouldn’t even recommend an iPhone to my father.
Comment by Steven Herod — June 1, 2010 @ 8:08 am
Mark: As I said, you’re wrong. The choice should be there.
I’m not apologizing for anything, I’m trying to politely point out a different opinion to your own. One I believe the majority of users, both of the device in question, and in general would agree with.
This is driving people into a frenzy because you seem to be refusing to even acknowledge points of view other than your own.
Case in point: “Choice is nearly always confusing to the user” – Completely false, and assumes far, far too much. Some choices are sometimes confusing for some users.
Well presented choices with simple/quick/automatic behavior make many things much more usable. The problem is rarely choice, it’s how the choice is presented.
Usability vs Functionality, correct, they are not the same, however they are very, very closely intertwined and neither are a static concepts. Today, even the Luddites are being dragged into the 21st century. What was good usable interface practices 30, 20, or even 5 years ago are not generally applicable today. Usability evolves with the times, as does functionality, as does the average user’s capabilities.
Yes, many practices may still be applicable, but some are not. Each new evolution of anything needs to take a step back and re-evaluate what should and should not be kept in the next generation. – The case of hiding critical functionality in the name of simplicity is one that needs to be turfed. (Apple get this wrong in my opinion.)
A device is not “usable” if commonly needed functions are hidden and difficult to get to, the case in point of this article. – I’m happy to explain this point further with direct regard to the Desire USB if you like, but you’ve indicated by your last comment that’s a distraction to your points. (The apologetics comment.)
Finally, the error is in your article and your responses. To break it down to basics, removing all brands/marketing, your article is saying that: Device “A” should do “X” in a “Y” way. – essentially a complaint about how the device does not perform in a certain way.
However, the device in question, does “X”, in the way described as “Y”. – The very point of the article is redundant.
Again, I’m happy to explain these points in more detail with regards to this particular article and device if you’ll stop with the marketing innuendo.
It already does what you want it to do, in the way you want it to do it! – That is my point. The whole article is wrong, as the article essentially is request to do something that the subject of the article already does.
My motivations are simple, I, as a consumer have a relationship with you as a public figure, where I respect and look to your advise when making some decisions. I firmly believe you have a misconception with regards to the particular UI on this particular device. I wish you to see and honestly evaluate my point of view, so as I can better trust your future public statement. Your responses so far indicate that you’ve missed the key points I’m attempting to make. – That leaves two situations, either I’ve not articulated them in a way you understand them, or you’re not open to looking at the points.
I truly hope it’s the former.
If feel that because the article is very specific about a certain behavior of a certain device, and I don’t think I can explain my points fully without being very specific about the device and it’s interface. This is neither apologist nor marketing. However I can see how the comments in this public forum can be misconstrued this way. You are free to E-Mail me, the address supplied to the comment system is accurate if you wish to avoid that.
FYI: Full disclosure: I am a reluctant Telstra customer, employed by a company which competes with certain Telstra business units. – None of which is really relevant other than to point out I am in no way affiliated with Telstra or HTC, hence I resent the marketing innuendo in the previous comment.
I personally find this marketing innuendo very insulting. However that’s something I’m probably taking far too seriously, honestly that comment is what has fired me up the most, I think need to get over it.
Comment by Glenn Stephens — June 1, 2010 @ 8:45 am
I thought a lot about this last night, and I’m beginning to wonder, could this entire thread have been avoided if Google/Android had used the phrase:
“Use as a disk drive” in place of “Mount as a disk drive”
It seems to me this may be the sticking point. Not the choice, as it seems simple, context sensitive and to balance the needs of many levels of users. Also the default behavior is a sane one…
All in all the interface seems well thought out and implemented, it just seems to be the one little word that’s tripping people up?
(I’m now thinking of the stress I could have saved myself and others had I only spotted that earlier, time for a cuppa…)
Comment by Glenn Stephens — June 2, 2010 @ 12:29 am
> I thought a lot about this last night, and I’m beginning to wonder, could this entire thread have been avoided if Google/Android had used the phrase:
> “Use as a disk drive” in place of “Mount as a disk drive”
Nope. Sorry:
* The phone is not big enough to fit a disk in it
* It’s still a blocking dialog
* Any selection means you can’t do some of the tasks which the phone is capable of
* No selection means you can’t do any tasks (except changing) that the phone is capable of
> It seems to me this may be the sticking point. Not the choice, as it seems simple, context sensitive and to balance the needs of many levels of users. Also the default behavior is a sane one…
The default behaviour is sane but horrible for UX. It does nothing to assist the user in completing 3/4 of the tasks.
> All in all the interface seems well thought out and implemented, it just seems to be the one little word that’s tripping people up?
The user interface is clean and tidy and anyone who knows that (without a special filesystem); mounting a block device from two hosts is a bad idea; will be able to work out what each of the options are and what limitations they place on the tasks you are able to complete with them selected. Users will not and shouldn’t have to.
I believe Mark’s point is; there should not be an interface there in the first place. When the phone is plugged in over USB it should start changing the battery. If the user runs a PIM synchronisation tool on their computer, the phone should respond to the sync requests. If the user runs a file transfer program, the phone should present its storage areas as a source and target for files. If the user loads up their network manager, the phone’s modem device should be available as a networking adapter.
All of those 4 things should be running in the background the whole time the USB cable is plugged in unless they are switched off through a menu item in the phone. The user should not have to choose which of the tasks they do not wish to do for the duration that the phone is connected over USB.
When switching between tasks that should only require interaction at the software layers requires switching things at the physical layer; you’ve failed to design a good UX.
> (I’m now thinking of the stress I could have saved myself and others had I only spotted that earlier, time for a cuppa…)
It’s not time to celebrate yet.
Comment by Adam — June 2, 2010 @ 2:11 am
Sorry Adam, still not convinced… One quick point first however, I don’t believe the screen is required, but I also don’t believe it shouldn’t be there. It is there, and I think the device is better for it, however the device would be useful without it.
Anyway, back tot he specific points:
* The phone is not big enough to fit a disk in it
The Phrase “Disk Drive” is the major concession to the less technical users. – and note really relevant here -Anyone that uses computers knows that a “Disk Drive” is where everything is stored, from the Luddites to the Geeks that know everything. While the Geeks also know the terms “Flash Drive” etc. are a more accurate description, the non-technical users don’t. “Disk Drive” is the lowest common denominator, and it works for every one, even if it makes some of us whince.
* It’s still a blocking dialog
I completely disagree here, there is no blocking action at all. The dialog in no way stops any of the devices functions, or the using of the device. Everything continues as before, regardless of the dialog. I really, really can’t understand how you can perceive this as “blocking”, it’s nothing of the sort.
As for the other two points and the explanation of the ideal operation are fair points, however to achieve this you need to re-write the behavior, security and specification of every USB enabled computer and device to achieve that.
It’s a chicken and egg problem, you want the egg first, yet evolution has given you the chicken.
If the file transfer options are presented to the computer immediately, 99.999% of computers will automatically launch the File Transfer application, immediately interrupting whatever you’re currently working on. Same goes for the Synchronization application and the automatic connection to the new internet connection overrides the computers existing network connections. This is how USB and computer operating systems currently work, and it’s how users expect them to work as well.
To achieve what you’ve described means a very radical change in how computers behave.
To stop the device from taking over your system, especially when you just want to top up the battery, a simple choice is presented with defaults which match what the majority of users will want to do. If you’re not in that majority, you’re not left out.
Granted, if you’re a power user that wants to use three or more of the functions simultaneously then you definitely have a case to ask Google/Android for more functions. – And this is descending into functionality, not usability. (While closely related, it’s starting to drift from Mark’s original point i think.)
While you have made a good argument for an alternative, it’s simply not a viable option in todays ecosystem.
Comment by Glenn Stephens — June 2, 2010 @ 3:08 am
> Sorry Adam, still not convinced… One quick point first however, I don’t believe the screen is required, but I also don’t believe it shouldn’t be there. It is there, and I think the device is better for it, however the device would be useful without it.
You don’t have to apologise that I haven’t convinced you yet. I’m sorry I haven’t convinced you yet.
> Anyway, back tot he specific points:
>> * The phone is not big enough to fit a disk in it
> The Phrase “Disk Drive” is the major concession to the less technical users. – and note really relevant here -Anyone that uses computers knows that a “Disk Drive” is where everything is stored, from the Luddites to the Geeks that know everything. While the Geeks also know the terms “Flash Drive” etc. are a more accurate description, the non-technical users don’t. “Disk Drive” is the lowest common denominator, and it works for every one, even if it makes some of us whince.
What I was trying to say is that I don’t think users do know that a disk drive is where everything is stored.
This quote from Helen’s comment sums it up:
“it isn’t a drive, it’s a phone”.
>> * It’s still a blocking dialog
> I completely disagree here, there is no blocking action at all. The dialog in no way stops any of the devices functions, or the using of the device. Everything continues as before, regardless of the dialog. I really, really can’t understand how you can perceive this as “blocking”, it’s nothing of the sort.
The device forces you to interact with the dialog to enable the user to complete a task on a different device. If I plug my phone into my computer it’s because a) I want to charge it or b) I want to do something on my computer that uses the functionality my phone provides. As soon as I have plugged the cable in, if I’m doing anything other than charging it, I want to go to the place where the action is going to occur.
This problem happens with my n95 all the time. I plug the cable in, open up the Gnome Network Manager applet and try to connect to the net. When the connection doesn’t show up; I pause for a second to work out what’s broken; when I remember, I go back to my phone and select ‘phone mode’ or something named even worse than the options on the HTC.
It’s not just the labels that make this annoying.
> As for the other two points and the explanation of the ideal operation are fair points, however to achieve this you need to re-write the behavior, security and specification of every USB enabled computer and device to achieve that.
I don’t agree that it would need such a change to the specification. There is already a method for having multiple endpoints on the same cable. A hardware USB Hub could be used to provide a SyncML device and a Modem device. This may require two USB slave ports on the SoC that the phone uses. That would be of no use for the current handset though. To fix this for the current generation of Android handsets requires a purely software based approach.
It would be possible to write a device driver to expose multiple serial ports on the device (one for SyncML comms, one for DUN, one for some new fangled use we haven’t thought of yet). With the protocol spec and a reference implementition open, there’s no reasson it couldn’t be ported to other OSes. If it means writing layer 7 code on the device and the host, then that’s what it would be.
There is nothing in the USB specification that stops a developer multiplexing several channels of data to the one endpoint. There already a bunch of devices that do multiple serial ports over USB, they just level shift the signals back up to RS232 and leave the serial ports open for generic uses rather than fixing them onto hardware USARTs. http://www.usbserial.com/
> It’s a chicken and egg problem, you want the egg first, yet evolution has given you the chicken.
I’m going to eat them both right after I code up software to make the chicken lay me an egg.
> If the file transfer options are presented to the computer immediately, 99.999% of computers will automatically launch the File Transfer application, immediately interrupting whatever you’re currently working on. Same goes for the Synchronization application and the automatic connection to the new internet connection overrides the computers existing network connections.
You’ve just listed a bunch of design decisions which are UX fails for the desktop environment. All of which can be fixed in software.
> This is how USB and computer operating systems currently work, and it’s how users expect them to work as well.
This is not a function of USB or the operating system. It’s a function of the desktop environment, which is software, configurable and easy to change. None of my desktops change my network settings when I plug in a new networking device unless I have specifically told it to do that. Sync software is just software, none of them behave exactly the same. The software can be put in its place with configuration options or replaced with something else that talks the right protocol.
If the user expects all those things to happen then why are you arguing against it? I suspect it’s because you don’t agree that its the right behaviour in this situation.
USB has taught us that when you plug something in, if the drivers are installed, it just works. No other device that I can think of makes me disable features on it when I plug it in.
> To achieve what you’ve described means a very radical change in how computers behave.
I don’t think the changes I suggest are at all radical.
> To stop the device from taking over your system, especially when you just want to top up the battery,
I don’t think the software on the host needs to take over the system when a new device is plugged in.
> a simple choice is presented with defaults which match what the majority of users will want to do. If you’re not in that majority, you’re not left out.
We keep getting back to the fact that you have to choose what tasks you do not wish to do while the phone remains connected and it’s still broken.
> Granted, if you’re a power user that wants to use three or more of the functions simultaneously then you definitely have a case to ask Google/Android for more functions. – And this is descending into functionality, not usability. (While closely related, it’s starting to drift from Mark’s original point i think.)
I don’t want more functions, I want the same functions without having to disable any of them. So that I can do more than one task, concurrently or serially, without re-plugging and re-choosing what I don’t want to do for that period.
> While you have made a good argument for an alternative, it’s simply not a viable option in todays ecosystem.
I’m glad that I’ve managed to convince you it’s a Good Idea. Now I just have to convince you that it’s attainable.
Comment by Adam — June 2, 2010 @ 6:50 am
Uh Oh! I forgot to make my point in this section!
> There is nothing in the USB specification that stops a developer multiplexing several channels of data to the one endpoint. There already a bunch of devices that do multiple serial ports over USB, they just level shift the signals back up to RS232 and leave the serial ports open for generic uses rather than fixing them onto hardware USARTs. http://www.usbserial.com/
What I meant to say here is that; from the desktop OS side, there are already devices that do this. Anything based on FTDI’s FT4232H looks like 4 different serial ports to the OS, even though the FTDI chip only uses one USB device address. The muuxing/dmuxing of the serial data happens in the device driver on the desktop side and in the “USB Protocol Engine and FIFO control” on the device side.
To implement this on an Android handset, the USB Protocol Engine would be handled by the SoC’s hardware USB device and the “FIFO Control” (or some other Mux/Demux system) would be implemented in a device driver or daemon in Arduino kernel land.
I can’t see any reason why this isn’t technically possible.
Comment by Adam — June 2, 2010 @ 7:15 am
As Devo said
“Freedom of choice is what you got
Freedom from choice is what you want”
I think that is much of the substance about UX debates. Why give someone choices they don’t need or want.
Comment by Sean — June 3, 2010 @ 9:27 pm