Linked by Kostis Kapelonis on Thu 2nd Nov 2006 10:21 UTC
While the capabilities of operating systems have improved over the last years, the improvements have largely focused on under the hood changes. New functionality is reaching the user via additional applications which allow her to write a DVD, connect to her mp3 player, download streaming video locally and other tasks which were not present before. But the graphical interface of the computer itself is keeping the same concepts introduced with its appearance. One could argue that the graphical environment of computers is exactly the same for the last 10 years and only cosmetic changes take place in newer versions of operating systems. Moving away from the desktop metaphor is harder than it seems. Even alternative operating systems have embraced the concept instead of exploring new ideas. This article describes a solution which attempts to free the user from the files/folder concept.
Thread beginning with comment 178009
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Recent Original Stories
Recent Comments
Headlines
Random Comments
Random Stories
Random OS Link
Member since:
2006-07-29
I'm surprised by the number of negative reactions. All Kostis is saying is that files are a technical artifact in which most people wouldn't be interested if they didn't have to be. Files are a needlessly overloaded concept - some files contain data (most interesting to users), some files contain configuration (considerably less interesting) and some contain programs (which are only interesting in so far as you launch them from files). This is both confusing and dangerous for non-geeks.
Kostis is simply suggesting that we get away from the tired old concept of files and programs and get to the concept of data and capabilities. Windows' start menu and its attempts at hiding "system" files from users are a weak attempt at doing this. The web (think Google Mail, Google Maps, Google ...), has done a comparatively better job of focusing on data and capability, which is probably why users seem to have an easier time learning and using web interfaces than traditional desktop apps, even though the web interfaces are often less slick. Sure, there's a lot of files being used there, but it's all managed by experts working in data centers.
As to tagging and metadata, the current scheme for naming files is nothing but a simplistic tagging mechanism that encodes relationship (folders), identity (file name) and type (extension). There's no reason that a tag-based storage mechanism can't use these fields as a starting point but then add considerable value where additional metadata is available (either via the data source or by the user).
The key to successfully moving beyond the file system is to provide a competent browser mechanism that gives users a fall back for when they can't remember specific searchable terms and that lets them instead explore their data and use spatial memory to recognize matches. It might also be nice to provide an expert system that helps users who start with a vague idea of what they're looking for to iteratively narrow their results. Think of a good librarian - you might walk into the library knowing very little about what you're looking for, but by questioning you about your objectives, (s)he can help you find exactly the right book.
At the end of the day, software that makes you do anything that's not directly related to your real work objectives should be considered a failure. To Kostis (and to me) that means that users should never have to touch anything called a "file" unless it's actually a file (e.g. my 2006 tax file).