The Curious Complexity of Being Turned On
stevehanov.ca
stevehanov.ca
This is why you design the thing, before internal operation. He's working in the wrong mental design language, thinking in terms of how the thing works, rather than how the user interacts.
Is this why so many enterprise apps are f'ed up?
When it comes to third party apps and other things turning the mood detector on and off without the users permission or notification that makes no sense and sounds like a bad idea in the first place. But if it is essential I would make it pop up a confirmation request on the UI so that the user can not only choose whether or not to allow the on/off behavior, but so they will also be aware that the device is going to be turning on or off. Once again while the device is turning on or off show the progress bar.
on/off seems easy, but it's hard in complex systems. Like how complex can it be to turn windows vista on and off, right?
That is the difference between e.g. Apple and Microsoft. Microsoft keeps adding features so that it can do what a user wants. Apple designs the unit so that it does what the user wants.
At least most of them, and the rest should go meditate on how to become better users ;-)
The problem was that, each of the chips, in its boot sequence, checked that it had the same firmware version as the other chips and died if didn't. Thus no upgrade sequence was possible.
And this problem was discovered close to release.
Bootstrap problems sound ridiculously easy to find "in the design phase" but they are actually quite hard since they depend on overall system properties.