<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>A Wheeler goes round &#187; Vista</title>
	<atom:link href="http://igmo.org/blog/category/vista/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://igmo.org/blog</link>
	<description>Thoughts on audio driver dev</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 17 Oct 2006 02:15:01 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.1.2</generator>
		<item>
		<title>History Lesson: PC Audio Usability</title>
		<link>http://igmo.org/blog/2006/03/27/history-lesson-pc-audio-usability/</link>
		<comments>http://igmo.org/blog/2006/03/27/history-lesson-pc-audio-usability/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 27 Mar 2006 21:43:31 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>andrew</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[PC Audio]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Vista]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://igmo.org/blog/2006/03/27/history-lesson-pc-audio-usability/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Before getting deep into Vista audio, I want to relate some history, and give a little bit of my perspective on PC audio.&#160; (Note: I have a tendency to use &#34;PC audio&#34; to mean &#34;Windows audio&#34;.&#160; No slight intended on Linux folks.)&#160; I&#8217;m going to start by discussing current PC audio usability.&#160;&#160; Put simply, it [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Before getting deep into Vista audio, I want to relate some history, and give a little bit of my perspective on PC audio.<span>&nbsp; </span>(Note: I have a tendency to use &quot;PC audio&quot; to mean &quot;Windows audio&quot;.<span>&nbsp; </span>No slight intended on Linux folks.)<span>&nbsp; </span>I&#8217;m going to start by discussing current PC audio usability.<span>&nbsp;&nbsp; </span>Put simply, it sucks.</p>
<p>At its most basic, the usability problems are pretty simple: when Aunt Bee gets a new email from Opie, she simply wants to hear &quot;You&#8217;ve Got Mail!&quot;&nbsp; She doesn&#8217;t want to think about hooking up the speakers, <span>turning on </span>the speakers, finding and installing drivers that actually work, finding the sound control panel, finding the <span>other </span>sound control panel, unmuting the audio, setting the volume, configuring her mail reader to&nbsp;blurt &quot;You&#8217;ve Got Mail!&quot; when Opie emails her, re-hooking up the speakers because she got it wrong the first time, turning the volume up on the speakers, etc., etc., etc&#8230;..&nbsp;</p>
<p>It&#8217;s just too much for most end users to deal with.&nbsp; Heck, it&#8217;s too much for <span>me </span>to deal with, and I develop these things!&nbsp;</p>
<p>What most people want and expect is the same experience they get with their TV: they click a button to turn it on, and then <span>hear audio</span>.<span>&nbsp; </span>It may be white noise &#8211; but they hear <span>something</span>.</p>
<p>Yah, a bunch of people hook up Home Theater systems to their TVs (and their PCs &#8211; that&#8217;s a future blog article), which takes more equipment and special configuration.&nbsp; But it&#8217;s not the <span>default</span>: it&#8217;s an <span>option</span> <span>that can be safely ignored</span>.&nbsp; The important thing is that the TV&#8217;s home theater option doesn&#8217;t get in the way of Aunt Bee from hearing her soaps when she turns on her TV.&nbsp; For the base &#8211; and most common &#8211; case, the TV still <span>just works.&nbsp; </span>(Now, of course, Andy could install a Home Theater system for Aunt Bee as an Earth day gift, and then Barney could come over, eat all Bee&#8217;s pretzels and futz with the remotes that Andy told Bee to <span>never, ever touch except for these four buttons right here&#8230;.</span>.&nbsp; But at least out-of-the-box Aunt Bee can happily watch &amp; listen to her soaps.)</p>
<p>PC audio, though, simply isn&#8217;t there yet.&nbsp; Many systems don&#8217;t even come with speakers, let alone allow for easy configuration.&nbsp;</p>
<p>Take, for example, the main Windows volume control: </p>
<div align="center"><span><img src="http://www.etcetera.co.uk/Support/Recording_files/howto5_2.jpg" width="546" height="289" /></span> </div>
<p> 
<p>What <em>are </em>all those sliders?&nbsp; I dunno, but, let me assure you, they certainly aren&#8217;t what you&#8217;d expect them to be. Like you&#8217;d maybe expect <em>CD Audio</em> to control your,<br /> well, CD audio.&nbsp; But it&#8217;s hit-or-miss: it depends on how your CD drive is<br /> wired into your system and what app you&#8217;re using to play your CDs.&nbsp; And <em>PC Beep </em>reminds me of that scene in <strong><a href="http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B000AP04L0/qid=1143406520/sr=8-1/ref=pd_bbs_1/104-7143075-0996750?%5Fencoding=UTF8&amp;v=glance&amp;n=130">Office Space</a> </strong>when that guy is trying to figure out the fax machine: </p>
<p>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; <em>PC load letter?&nbsp; What the f- does that mean?!</em></p>
<p> Let&#8217;s take a second and contrast this with the Mac.&nbsp; Now, I&#8217;m not anywhere <em>close </em>to being a Mac apologist.&nbsp; We are a dual-OS household, and our iMac frustrates me much more than any of our PCs.&nbsp; But Macs do have one thing nailed: the audio.&nbsp; But every iMac ships with either built-in speakers, or a pair of external speakers.&nbsp; They&#8217;re not great, but they&#8217;re good enough for Aunt Bee (and the external ones even look nice).&nbsp; The volume control is in the top-right corner, and there&#8217;s only one:<br /> 
<div align="center"> </div>
<div align="center"><a href="http://classroom.la.utexas.edu/classroom/console_rooms/bur_224/bur_224_vol.html"><img src="http://classroom.la.utexas.edu/photographs/phto_mac_volume.jpg" width="562" height="365" /></a> </div>
<p> 
<p>A keen observer may note that Windows <span>does </span>have a little system tray icon that only displays a single volume knob, but it is hit-or-miss w/rt showing up, and it&#8217;s really just hiding all but one of those volume controls in the main control panel.&nbsp; In the Mac world, there <span>is </span>only one playback volume control, as far as I can tell.</p>
<p>But there&#8217;s extremely good reasons why Windows audio is so convoluted.&nbsp; It mostly comes down to two: the need for legacy support, and Windows&#8217; open audio architecture.&nbsp;</p>
<p>The legacy support requirements means that MS has a real hard time fixing any of the braindead issues: just removing one of those crazy volume controls would be a heroic effort.&nbsp;</p>
<p>Legacy support is what it is, but I want to focus on the other issue: Windows&#8217; open audio architecture.&nbsp; The open architecture means that guys like me have <span>way </span>more control over the end-user&#8217;s audio experience than we really should have.&nbsp; Microsoft sets some basic ground rules, but then we can do whatever we want outside of that.&nbsp; Want to support a 46-channel soundcard?&nbsp; Sure, no problem.&nbsp; Want to expose it as a single 46-channel device?&nbsp; Sure.&nbsp; Or how about 23 stereo devices?&nbsp; Sure.&nbsp; Well, how about <span>both </span>a 46-channel device <span>and </span>23 stereo devices?&nbsp; Yeah, of course we can do that, too.&nbsp; (A similar example just came up on the <a href="http://www.freelists.org/list/wdmaudiodev"><span>wdmaudiodev mailing list</span></a> &#8211; there&#8217;s actually legitimate reasons for doing something like this).&nbsp;</p>
<p>Now I&#8217;m certainly not suggesting that codec vendors should be left out in the cold: we certainly <span>can</span> and <span>do</span> add huge value to Windows audio &#8211; in fact, <span>too much </span>value.&nbsp; The problem is that the open architecture is somewhat of a crutch<span> </span>for Microsoft.&nbsp; Because we have such free reign, Microsoft hasn&#8217;t had to sweat too many of the PC audio details.&nbsp; Yeah, the built-in controls suck, but system manufacturers that care can get codec vendors to produce new control panels.&nbsp; And we do: each codec vendor has its own, custom-tailored control panel.&nbsp; And though the control panels do pretty-much the same thing, they&#8217;re all fairly different from each other: different look &amp; feel, slightly different controls, etc.&nbsp;</p>
<p>Take, for instance, the <span>speaker wizard</span>.&nbsp; Almost all of the vendors&#8217; audio control panels have some sort of speaker wizard that will help you plug the proper speaker into the proper jack.&nbsp; Some are more hand-holdy, with the &quot;did you hear the sound?&#8230;&nbsp; Okay, where did you hear the sound?&quot; type of dialogs, while others are of the click-the-speaker-and-it-will-make-a-noise variety.&nbsp; In this case, being different doesn&#8217;t really help: it just frustrates the end user, who really just wants to get his or her speakers working with as little thought about it as possible.</p>
<p>The thing is, none of us codec vendors really <span>want </span>to make a speaker wizard: we just have to because Windows doesn&#8217;t provide one.&nbsp; Admittedly, we&#8217;re always happy to get some branding in front of the consumer, and a speaker wizard may not be a bad place to do it.&nbsp; But it&#8217;s still a good chunk of work, and really not an area we want to focus on.&nbsp; We&#8217;d rather be improving audio fidelity, adding Dolby Digital support, improving our device-discovery (<span>JackSense</span>) technology and GUI,&nbsp; etc.&nbsp;</p>
<p>And this is also no good for the consumer: what they really need is for Microsoft to spend a few hundred thousand dollars on usability studies, figure out the best way to lay out a speaker wizard for 85.777% of the population, implement that, spend a few more hundred thousand dollars on usability studies that that disprove the first studies, re-implement the speaker wizard, then be done with it.&nbsp; Or at a minimum,<span>&nbsp; </span>Microsoft&#8217;s audio GUI guy should build the speaker wizard, show it to some of the other developers, let them kibitz about it for a few weeks, then ship it.&nbsp; This would make it on par with all the other speaker wizards out there &#8211; but then at least the consumer would get the same speaker wizard each time they pulled it up on a Windows system.</p>
<p>So now, almost every PC has <span>at least</span> two audio control panels: the Windows control panel, and the Codec vendor&#8217;s control panel, which may or may not include all the basic Windows audio controls.&nbsp; Great: Aunt Bee is even <span>more </span>confused when she tries to get her &quot;You&#8217;ve Got Mail!&quot; working.&nbsp; What&#8217;s worse, Andy can&#8217;t help her because his PC has a completely different audio control panel.</p>
<p>So what we need is for Windows to take care of the basics, and also enable codec vendors to enhance the audio experience.&nbsp; And it should do this in a way that ties together the user interface into some sort of cohesive unit.&nbsp;</p>
<p>As luck would have it, one of the main goals of Vista audio is to resolve some of the more glaring usability issues.<span>&nbsp; </span>Next time, we&#8217;ll look a bit more at how Microsoft is going about this, and how it&#8217;s panning out so far.<span>&nbsp; </span></p>
<p>Let me finish, though, by saying that this isn&#8217;t going to be another &quot;MS sucks&quot; blog.<span>&nbsp; </span>I have huge respect for the Vista audio team, and what they&#8217;re trying to accomplish.<span>&nbsp; </span>It&#8217;s a great undertaking, and so far it looks like they&#8217;re generally succeeding.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://igmo.org/blog/2006/03/27/history-lesson-pc-audio-usability/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>1</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>

