On Sun, Sep 12, 2010 at 2:55 PM, Indicator Veritatis <[email protected]>wrote:

> I really don't think he is the one missing the point. Your talk about
> "supporting an arbitrary number of everything" is a straw-man
> argument. Other than you, nobody proposed that in this thread.
>

Um I was directly responding to "I am really surprised that the Android
design would only account for one of anything." ...


> What has been observed with 20-20 hindsight though, is that the
> desirability of two SD cards should have been easy to foresee, as it
> is much more useful than "an arbitrary number of everything". It is
> much more useful, and for only a little extra hardware, than two
> screens, for example. Or two keyboards.
>

As I have *already* said, it's not as simple as just saying "oh we will
allow an arbitrary number of storage mounts."  How does this get reflected
in the UI?  How is the user made aware of it?  Does there need to be a
facility for the user to trawl through these different storage areas and
move things around if they are running out of space on one?  Does every
single application need to provide a UI for the user to select where to
store its data, and to move it between storage when needed?

If you just add the API, then it gets used, and app developers are obligated
to support it, and you are stuck with it, and it becomes a big mess if you
don't have answers to all of those hard questions.  Heck just the single SD
card is already quite a mess, and we have been struggling to clean that up.

In fact I think going down this road very likely leads to a really crummy
UX.  It begs a lot of questions: so my device has 16GB of built in storage,
and why can't I just use that as I want?  Why does it need to be arbitrarily
divided between "apps" and "media"?  What if I want more of one or the
other?

There needs to be a better solution to this than just "oh hey here's an API
to find out about a potentially infinite amount of storage in various
capacities, and y'all can figure out what the heck that means and what to do
with it."  To my mind what has been done so far on devices here is really
half-assed, and when that kind of thing gets introduced into the base
platform it needs to be much better thought out.

(And yes, I realize this is the situation on desktops.  This is an area
where we don't want to replicate the desktop experience.)

If manufacturers think what they are doing is super great and want to have
app developers support it, there is nothing stopping them from defining
their own third party API to allow it.  Or even working together to define
an API that is common between them.  It's not like you have to wait for the
base platform to take care of things for you.

-- 
Dianne Hackborn
Android framework engineer
[email protected]

Note: please don't send private questions to me, as I don't have time to
provide private support, and so won't reply to such e-mails.  All such
questions should be posted on public forums, where I and others can see and
answer them.

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups "Android Developers" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
[email protected]
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/android-developers?hl=en

Reply via email to