Pocket PC 2002 Logo Testing Lab partners with HP

[Andy Sjostrom]

<a href="http://www.qualitylogic.com/certification_programs.html">http://www.qualitylogic.com/certification_programs.html</a><br /><br />QualityLogic, administers testing for Microsoft's "Designed for Windows for Pocket PC 2002" logo program, and HP recently announced an agreement which states that HP "will provide iPAQ H3800, H3700 and H3100 Series models and accessories for use in testing Pocket PC 2002 applications."<br /><br /><img src="http://www.pocketpcthoughts.com/images/logo_01.gif" />

[Will T Smith]

My other big problem with Microsoft's App GUI guidlines are the dialgoues.

Microsoft wants all dialogues to say

[ "Do you want ... yadda ... yadda ... yadda

"Yes" "No" "Cancel" ]


It's much easier to for a user to associate pressing a button with an action.

[ "Save" "Discard Changes" "Cancel" ]


The generic Yes, No, Cancel, and OK, cancel, Force the user to pay extra special attention to the wording in the dialogue. I have encountered some questions that contained double negatives making it very nerve racking to choose a course of action.

I believe that the generic buttons are pursuant to the creation of GUI testing scripts. However, one should not sacrifice the user's experience in pursuit of easy testing scripts. In fact when the purpose of a dialogue changes the testing script should break reflecting a potential change.

I would much rather App developers follow the needs of customers while keeping in touch with well known GUI paradigms. Innovation is great when it's a one-off and does not change the original meaning of concepts. This is where the "X-Button" runs afoul. It presents an existing symbology with an existing meaning and then CHANGES that meaning.

Yes, perhaps it is more appropriate to minimize programs, however, on PocketPC that is analogous to a task switch. The "X-Button" should close the app down and free resources. That is the accepted convention on all other computing platforms.

[Jason Dunn]

This is where the "X-Button" runs afoul. It presents an existing symbology with an existing meaning and then CHANGES that meaning.

I have said this over and over to people at Microsoft, including some senior people that actually make these decisions, and they seem quite set in their ways. Completely mysterious...I have yet to find one person outside the Mobile Devices team that things the "X" not closing the application is "cool". :?

[Jimmy Dodd]

I still believe that the sole reason behind the "X" minimize method is to make the built in apps seem faster on startup. For Task, Calendar, et. al. this makes sense, because if you run the same five or six apps over and over during a day (and those apps are not resource hogs) then you gain some perceived speed increases. If you are running big apps like Adobe's Reader or an app that accesses .cdb files then the argument goes out the window as everything slows down and memory begins to run dry.

Personally, I prefer apps that meet the standard by sneaking in an "optional" Exit menu via a config setting. That way everybody's happy. :D

---
Bwana Jim

[Jason Dunn]

I still believe that the sole reason behind the "X" minimize method is to make the built in apps seem faster on startup.

That's exactly what it was for - to match Palm in speed. That's fine for PIM like you said, but it fails to address the "heavy" apps like MS Reader and others, and hence you have problems.

[Marc Zimmermann]

I have yet to find one person outside the Mobile Devices team that things the "X" not closing the application is "cool". :?

I don't think it's cool, but it doesn't actually bother me. I've used WIS Bar and PocketNav for some time and didn't actually notice a difference between hiding and closing.

[Dave Beauvais]

... That's fine for PIM like you said, but it fails to address the "heavy" apps like MS Reader and others, and hence you have problems.
Most built-in apps will close using the Ctrl-Q keyboard shortcut, but Reader doesn't. The only way to close it is from the "Running Programs" tab or with a third-party task manager app. Usability issues like that are another reason I dislike Reader. And what about MSN Messenger? I could see that screwing people who think they're closing the app, but are actually still connected long after. Yeah, there's a "Sign out" menu option, but why is it so wrong to have a simple Exit option? Mapopolis (http://www.mapopolis.com/) has one, Palm Reader (http://www.peanutpress.com/product/reader/browse/free) has one, Yahoo Messenger (http://messenger.yahoo.com/messenger/ce/downloads_ce_msgr.html) and ICQ (http://www.icq.com/download/ftp-pocketpc.html) have one. Heck, now that I think about it, almost all third-party applications that I use have an Exit menu option. Why doesn't Microsoft realize that real people want this!

--Dave

[Andy Sjostrom]

... even Microsoft's own SQL Server CE Analyzer has a File Exit... :roll:

[Andy Sjostrom]

... and here's the last portion of the first page post!

The program is meant to ensure that Pocket PC 2002 applications follow Microsoft's "Ready for Windows® Logo Program for Windows® Powered Pocket PC Handbook for Software Applications", which eventually will allow end-users to "easily identify software products that are compatible with Microsoft Windows Powered Pocket PC 2002 devices". I have carefully studied Microsoft's technical handbook and find it quite useful with a couple of exceptions. In fact, in Chris Forsberg's and my book "Pocket PC Development in the Enterprise", we write:

"Reading the document prepares you well in understanding the thinking that Microsoft suggests application developers adopt in order to present a common user experience throughout the platform and across applications. We advise you to consider the guidelines found in the document. ... In our own reading we’ve also found certain aspects that we disagree with."

Guess what aspect we disagree most with!? Something about a certain X-button... More from the book:

"Isn’t nice of Microsoft to care so much about what the user worries about regarding managing memory? We understand that usability aspects have driven these guidelines, but respectfully disagree. Users have since the dark ages learned to close applications, and they still are required to do so in current desktop and server versions of Windows. The vast number of user postings in public newsgroups about the lack of manual methods to close applications testifies that we want control, not lack of control. The dreaded seven-tap process that is necessary to close an application drives quite a few users crazy..."

Well, well. This has been debated too many times already! No need to repeat ourselves again, is there!? If you are interested in how Microsoft wants developers to design Pocket PC 2002 applications, I recommend reading the document!