I'm not big on metaphors...most of them at some point stop being relevant. That being said, the purpose of folders is not entirely fulfilled by tagging. Tagging enables multiple sorting and finding (And keep in mind that it is entirely possible that none of the tags you apply today will ring a bell tomorrow. So it doesn't *solve* the multiple concepts problem.). Folders enable sorting, finding AND STORING. And one of the biggest impediments to locating anything is having visibility of things that are not going to be relevant.
This is why I alias the living daylights out of just about everything...mail, files, even folders. That enables me to access a particular item from just about anywhere my mind is holding it at the moment (which still doesn't solve the "my brain just made up a new category" problem). I find, though, that being confronted by a plethora of messages or files or whatever at any stage causes my brain to choke quickly. On an issue no one has brought up: Although the interfaces and capabilities of web-based mail clients are mostly pretty good -- to a greater or lesser degree -- they are all web-based. I want my mail on MY machine. I don't want to have to believe in Google's legal department to keep it out of the hands of the feds if there's a cracker somewhere using Gmail. I don't want to rely on their servers all being just fine...etc., etc., etc. I may be paranoid...and yes, I do understand that privacy is a pretty myth...but I still want to control it from my machine and my server. In any case, the idea that MY email is on Some Other Machine, immediately makes it a poorer user experience. And all of that leads me to be a devoted Eudora user...and a very bad rational critic thereof. I've been using it so long, I no longer notice if something could be done better. Katie At 2:34 PM -0700 10/10/07, Robert Hoekman, Jr. wrote: > > I don't understand why the folder >> model is supposed to be broken. It's not exactly a reflection of the >> underlying system. It's a metaphor taken from real life. > >The metaphor is what originally dictated how the system was built, but >the result is a weak system regardless. > >We're not dealing with physical objects here - we don't have to put >things in drawers and boxes. Computers are capable of doing this great >thing that we can't do with physical objects - keep them in multiple >places - so why stick to the old metaphor when a new one can be so >clearly superior? > >> Interestingly, in real life we don't usually label the things we want >> to archive, we put things into boxes, drawers, folders and label these >> containers. Just because foldering is an old metaphor it doesn't mean >> it's bad. In fact, it might be a great metaphor since it's been >> successful for a long time. > >I'm not saying it's a bad metaphor. I'm saying it results in a system >that doesn't live up to its potential. Tagging (or "labeling") is the >next logical step and we should pursue it further instead of clinging >to the old model just because it's worked in the past. > >> Also, why does the web have to be different from the desktop? Why not >> take working paradigms from the desktop and implement them into the >> web? > >Because the web has constraints the desktop simply doesn't have. It's >far better to build a system that works within its environment than >one that is forcefully crow-barred into a format that isn't >necessarily appropriate for it. > >Embracing the constraints of the web can force more creative solutions >that move us forward. Gmail is a great example of this. To build a >faster webmail client, Google conslidated conversations into a single >thread. To eliminate the heavy functionality that goes along with >foldering, they used a tag-based method that is light, and as an added >bonus, it has benefits well beyond foldering. By building something >specifically for the web environment (instead of copying desktop >designs), they came up with something that works better on the web >than most mail clients do on the desktop. > >> In a few years we won't talk about "desktop" and "web" anymore, >> it will all be the same animal. > >And I hope you're right, but that's not the case at the moment, and I >think that if we're going to get there, we need to be able to deal >with the constraints we have with both platforms right now in order to >unite them. > >-r- >________________________________________________________________ >Welcome to the Interaction Design Association (IxDA)! >To post to this list ....... [EMAIL PROTECTED] >Unsubscribe ................ http://gamma.ixda.org/unsubscribe >List Guidelines ............ http://gamma.ixda.org/guidelines >List Help .................. http://gamma.ixda.org/help -- ---------------- Katie Albers [EMAIL PROTECTED] ________________________________________________________________ Welcome to the Interaction Design Association (IxDA)! To post to this list ....... [EMAIL PROTECTED] Unsubscribe ................ http://gamma.ixda.org/unsubscribe List Guidelines ............ http://gamma.ixda.org/guidelines List Help .................. http://gamma.ixda.org/help
