[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       kde-usability
Subject:    Re: [KDE Usability] Users cannot find where to "safely remove" USB
From:       Dotan Cohen <dotancohen () gmail ! com>
Date:       2010-04-11 16:04:55
Message-ID: q2w880dece01004110904w1d8703a9w33939b337d2b90f1 () mail ! gmail ! com
[Download RAW message or body]

>> USB sticks can be pulled out at will, this is not a CDROM that needs a
>> physical eject mechanism.
>
> Actually, that is exactly what's missing. I assumed hardware developers
> omitted device locking because the technology ensured safe removal.
>

No, USB was intended for connecting peripherals, not removable
storage. The connectors are not even reliable for repeated plug/unplug
cycles, that is why one must take care to pull _out_, not to shake
back and forth.


>> Transferring a multi-GB file will take time.
>> There is therefore a window of time in which it is unsafe to remove
>> media.
>
> The same situation exists with network file systems (NFS). From a system's
> view, it matters little what caused the disconnect, what matters is how the
> system handles it.
>

NFS is connected via an assumed-permanent connection. One does not
connect/disconnect ethernet cables in daily usage.


>> > It is no longer a human error for a user to remove a device while it is
>> > being accessed. It is a system error if it results in data loss, or
>> > worse, corrupts the device. or causes a lock-up.
>>
>> That is naive and ideological.
>
> Perhaps, but doesn't change the fact that systems don't handle unexpected
> removals cleanly and users may remove sticks somewhat randomly.
>

I agree with you 100% here. The computer should adapt to the human,
not the other way around.


>> Some users do not understand what 4 GB
>> means, they cannot fathom that it takes more than a nanosecond to
>> transfer.
>
> ... and therefore cannot know what safe removal means. The reasoning should be
> followed to its logical conclusion. imho, the system is supposed to serve the
> user, not the user the system. Users should not be expected to handle system
> events (insert/removal) when they're presented with a virtual view (desktop
> metaphor) of the system.
>

I do expect that the user will at a minimum know to wait until the
computer says "you can remove the device now", whether that be due to
the computer's instigation (as is the idea under consideration) or due
to the user asking (by using the "Remove Safely" mechanism).


>> Increase transfer speeds?
>
> That avoids solving the underlying problem, which may work for unmounted
> devices, but not all. Ultimately, imho, it is a system problem, not KDE's nor
> users. Note KDE implemented file monitoring which Linux developers later
> added into the kernel, so requesting system developers to do the same here,
> would not be too presumptuous.
>

I agree.

-- 
Dotan Cohen

http://bido.com
http://what-is-what.com
_______________________________________________
kde-usability mailing list
kde-usability@kde.org
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-usability
[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]