User Centered

I've been reading this post for a number of days, debating on how best to respond because it's an issue I feel is... tricky.

I say your proposal is too difficult. I say it is also entirely unlikely because what's the return on investment? A manufacturer has to get it working well enough to be used, to do enough of what is expected, it doesn't have to make it easy.

Further, networking is not 'easy' -- even the most basic networking requires some serious "read the manual" time. I've recently had to write a instruction guide for addressing a network based device.

It was *very* difficult. The device has to be addressed to be on the same subnetwork as the host computer controlling it because of broadcast messages utilized to connect. Try explaining that to someone who doesn't know what an IP Address is let alone a subnet.

We've reached a place where someone knows how to use a web site, maybe email but has no freakin' clue how it all works. You just magically connect. They don't know about subnets, NAT, firewalls, wireless security, etc, etc.

And truth be told, those aren't easy topics. The protocols that the Internet were designed to use are not uncomplicated. And you want a program that deals with user goals?

Well, there is a trade-off. The user's main goal is to connect to the Internet, most people can do that with the basic setup of home router equipment. Anything else, then you are going to have to take the time to do some learning because it isn't easy!

Simply put, I don't believe networking is easy. You have to take the time to learn it to utilize it like an expert. Can any computer program ever truly turn you into an expert through simple questions?

I don't think so. Let me take some of your questions and delve into the complexity that could exist with them.

"I just bought a laptop and want to add it to my network."
Wireless or LAN or USB (some have USB), is network security invoked, is DHCP running, is the laptop a PC, Mac, Linux or some variation? Mostly, this is a question of the laptop and router working together... but neither has control over the other so the interface is usually the human being. This is one of the easier questions.

"I want someone to have temporary access to my network."
Well, that requires knowing who, when and with what? Software being written to support timed access to the network, but then how do you validate who is connecting with what equipment? MAC Address, IP address? Oh, you don't know what a MAC Address/IP Address are... well, how do we explain that. And where do you find that information? And are you talking about wireless or ethernet? Oh, what's ethernet? Well, that's the cable that plugs into your router/switch/hub and into your computer. Oh, what's a router switch/hub... etc, it just goes on and on!

"I want to have a printer (HDD..etc) shared on the network."
The number of questions here are limitless, each model of printer needing it's own customized setup routine. Connecting a printer to a network is the responsibility of the printer.

"Who has access to my network?/How secure is my network?"
This would be great, if you wanted to speak in generalities. If you have no wireless, it's limited to people who have physical access to your network. Have wireless, anyone without wireless range technically has access to your network. Have some sort of security enabled, well, they might hack it or might not. There is no unpenetrable network security. But just explaining that concept generally freaks eople out.

"I want to 'redesign' my network. (physically or logically) because I just bought a new WAP (or my girlfriend wants to move the entertainment center or...)"
Whoa. The endless questions here overwhelm me.

=====

My main point can be summed up like this: There is a reason we have car mechanics, cars are complex machines that require specialized training to fully understand, operate, design and repair.

Could they design a router that does everything you want. Absolutely. It would cost a few thousand dollars extra because of all the extra development time.

All That Said - There is room for improvement in the management interfaces of the typical "wireless home router", as we typically call them, but in reality they are router/switch/wireless hub/dhcp server/NAT/firewall/etc devices. However, if we want low cost networking solutions then we need less lofty goals than put forth here.

We've come a long way since Command Line Interfaces and in general the home router makers I've seen have improved a lot, in a general usability sense, since I first saw them on the market.

Sorry for the long post. I believe I was mostly frustrated having spent a few hours trying to figure out how to write a manual for people who probably know nothing about networks but only coming to the conclusion that I'd need another couple days to actually explain each concept and that most just want it to work... but there is not "just make it work" option when it comes to networking beyond the very constrained variables of a home network.


And this is why I get phone calls morning, afternoon, dinner-time or not from friends and family who have computer networking problems.

Well I agree with everything. My thoughts stem from the more and more I see devices as ubiquitous as cell phones and other things that are being marketed as things that we're all supposed to using all existing on our home network

I know security is important and I opened the post saying that stuff shouldn't be taken away.

I think the UI could very well start with my questions (what do I want to do?) and drill down into the details you bring up. I'm not advocating a dumb down interfce. Just a better vector for filling in the details.

But I've had this post sitting around for awhile because I've thought the same things you have. Plug and go routers are "good enough"

... I just get frustrated when I see all the default unsecure networks in my apartment complex and think that there is so much more that could be done to help the growing number of people trying to get a home network started.

...your mechanic analogy is good. Except when we buy a car we don't have to have mechanics build the car before we can drive it (safely)

Good points though. Thanks for the words.

Your comments about getting calls at Dinner time...is your point that maybe we shouldn't be "making it the norm" for everyone to have a home network if its so hard? Or just that the default unsecure settings are good enough?

Seems like seeing a commercial for how easy your life would be with a car, but then you go to buy one and there's just a bunch of car parts in your livingroom floor that you have to put together

Yes, I didn't think you wanted to dumb down the interface, in so much as smart it way, way, way up.

As I sat writing my instructions on a device that was inherently complicated to setup I wondered how I could write the instructions to make it simpler but realized, I just couldn't. I did try to make it easier to do what you wanted by categorizing based on the two major setup choices but I struggled beyond that.

Good point with the car. It is built safe and further, the infastructure you use to connect your car to the world requires a license to use. You do have to receive specialized training to do anything with your car.

Yum