ubuntu-phone team mailing list archive

[Matthew Paul Thomas <mpt@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Sam Bull wrote on 07/06/14 22:57:
> ...
> 
> So, in my house I have really bad signal, so it looked normal that 
> the network indicator showed the 0 bars icon, for a really weak 
> signal. But, when I tried to send a text message, it became 
> apparent that I actually had no connection, as it refused to let
> me send a text message or attempt a phone call despite the
> indicator telling me I'm connected.
> 
> ...
> 
> If this kind of situation happens, what is the network indicator 
> supposed to do? From this experience, I expect that if this 
> initialisation fails, the network indicator just shows the 0 bars 
> icon. If this is correct, I think we can say that this is the wrong
> behaviour, the indicator is thus explicitly telling me I have a
> phone connection, when in fact nothing is initialised. If the 
> indicator had shown an error icon, no icon, or even no signal, I 
> would have noticed the problem several hours earlier and not
> missed several attempts to contact me.
> 
> ...

You're right, this is a mistake in the design. Just showing zero bars
is not enough to indicate that you have no signal, regardless of what
the cause is.

(Various people have suggested I shorten other cellular error cases,
"SIM error" and "No service", to just icons too. I've maintained that
an icon alone wouldn't be obvious enough.)

I've updated the design and reported a corresponding bug.
<https://wiki.ubuntu.com/Networking?action=diff&rev2=195&rev1=194>
<http://launchpad.net/bugs/1329712>

- -- 
mpt

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/

iEYEARECAAYFAlOa8/wACgkQ6PUxNfU6ecobVACeIIxVLZcUsiuS70lEgFzuSeHc
4GMAoM4mVtgh7vuQyCAZIwBnjwhN1BXw
=vzYk
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----