| ??? 05/18/06 13:52 Read: times |
#116495 - The user's expectancy Responding to: ???'s previous message |
Paul said:
I was asked to look into the possibilty of charging the battery irrespective of the way the unit is connected. This is to take away the hassle for the user to put it in correctly. But why?? Taking care of the polarity of a battery is so much in the head of people living in modern civilizations, that I cannot see any reason to provide such a "don't care"-design. Why? Confusing the polarity of battery or accumulator can seriously injure or even kill you in many applications that have to do with batteries! Modern accumulators like Li-ion can explode for instance, car batteries contain an acid, which explodes right into your face, when making a mistake. No, just because of the danger of confusing the polarity of a battery, it would upset the user much more, if he now don't need to worry about polarity with your charger. Believe me, he will search for the polarity marks over and over again and will always have a bad feeling when having connected his battery to your charger. At least the paranoid users (like me) will... And think about the confusion: With your charger he don't need to worry, but with his other chargers he must. No, allthough looking like a good idea at the first moment, it will cause more trouble finally. Just because it does not satisfy the user's expectancy! Kai |
| Topic | Author | Date |
| Reverse insertion of battery | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| All things are possible | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Where is the charge controller chip? | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| It is more of a burning thing | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| add a rectifier bridge | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| echo | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| The user's expectancy | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| No mechanical polarization ? | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| And... | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
I've heard ... | 01/01/70 00:00 |