File management? Shove it!

I'm not sure it's the concept of a file per se that's difficult, but people do tend to get lost faced with a hierarchical filesystem with folders nested inside other folders, etc. Personally I think the filesystem will continue to coexist with other methods of organization, which is what the Metro style file picker kind of represents, if only the actual file part of it weren't so bad. Seriously, it's great that you can puck files from apps with a tailored presentation, but given that it DOES allow you to delve deep into nested folders, the necessary tools for that should be there when you do - breadcrumbs, pasteable address bar (which could be tucked away in an app bar as in IE), etc. 

I'm not sure it's the concept of a file per se that's difficult, but people do tend to get lost faced with a hierarchical filesystem with folders nested inside other folders, etc. Personally I think the filesystem will continue to coexist with other methods of organization, which is what the Metro style file picker kind of represents, if only the actual file part of it weren't so bad. Seriously, it's great that you can pick files from apps with a tailored presentation, but given that it DOES allow you to delve deep into nested folders, the necessary tools for that should be there when you do - breadcrumbs, pasteable address bar (which could be tucked away in an app bar as in IE), etc. 

6 hours ago, AndyC wrote

*snip*

Ever had to explain that replacing their monitor won't make them lose the files on their desktop? Ever even tried to explain why, when opening a document from Hotmail, they need to save a copy somewhere otherwise it'll end up saved in some temporary folder and they'll never be able to find that version again?

I'm sure you've dealt with users, but I don't think you've really dealt with the masses.

Wow Andy you sure seem to know it all. Seems to me this attack is another example of you being part of the negativity here on these forums.

For the record I was a help desk guy for many years. I helped people find icons on their desktop. I've answered the phone with users saying "My Microsoft isn't working". While these users do exist they by far weren't the majority.

*snip*

You've missed the point. Nobody cares what the application does with the files.

Really? I thought they wanted to be able find their files and in some cases actually organize them but were just too lazy to do so. My bad.

4 days ago, DeathByVisualStudio wrote

And for the record I disagree with you're presumption that re file systems that "end users often find the concept quite confusing". There are just as many who find it useful. Also there is still a file picker in metro that relies on the file system so it's not going away any time soon. IMO we need all of the above: apps and an OS that provide better assistance in organizing and finding data in both the file system and via tags & search without arbitrary limitations like file paths. I suspect Microsoft will ignore the latter problem rather than fix it because IMO that's their M.O. these days: chase the shiny rather than fix the problems.

Based on AndyC's post's, he apparently thinks there are only two types of computer users: 1) Bearded old computer guys who can only talk and think in binary, and 2) People who were born with Down's Syndrome and were subsequently shot in the head causing brain damage to the point where they can't figure out what an on button is. Didn't you get the memo? All computer users are stupid and it's presently 1998.

@Craig_Matthews: You misunderstand the difference between being able to learn how to do something and actually having the desire to do so.

Most people could learn how to do everything on the command line and get by perfectly well with just DOS, graphical environments succeeded because people didn't want to have to learn arcane commands to get things done. File management on the PC is never the task people are actually wanting to accomplish, it's is merely something the computer makes them learn how to do in order to deal with it's limitations.

15 minutes ago, AndyC wrote

@Craig_Matthews: You misunderstand the difference between being able to learn how to do something and actually having the desire to do so.

Most people could learn how to do everything on the command line and get by perfectly well with just DOS, graphical environments succeeded because people didn't want to have to learn arcane commands to get things done. File management on the PC is never the task people are actually wanting to accomplish, it's is merely something the computer makes them learn how to do in order to deal with it's limitations.

And tagging & search isn't what people want to learn either but they have to if they'll be successful in finding their files later. Until the computer mind-reading interface is complete there is always some amount of learning that is involved.

@AndyC:

I don't think anyone has ever disputed the fact that someone must learn how to use a tool in order to use it. I was referring simply to the argument about end-users finding it difficult and confusing to understand folder heirarchies, when there is ample evidence to the contrary (e.g. the fact that people use them every day in their regular job seemingly without any confusion). I've worked with thousands of computer users and I can't say as I've met one who found it confusing at all. Then again, at all the places I've worked, we tend to hire people who have at least graduated high school and have used a computer before.

@Craig_Matthews: Well I think you have been lucky to have mainly computer literate users..  Most of the users we currently have don't use computers outside of work. They don't understand file systems because all the systems they work on are database-driven; they expect the data to just appear in the application when they search for it.  For most of our users, using tag and search for files would be business as usual.

It seems to me that MS has been driving Windows away from knowing how to navigate your filesystem for quite some time and Metro is a step further along that direction. For the majority of tablet users this isn't a problem, for the majority of desktop users they know where the file explorer is.

Herbie

@Craig_Matthews: I'd say you're definitely in a lucky position then. Even people who do still have to deal with filesystems for work often find it cumbersome. As Dr Herbie says, for the most part information workers get to use database driven systems that simply present the information they need without having to think about how or where it comes from. That's a lot more logical to most people and the way they expect things to happen.

I've dealt with plenty of perfectly intelligent people who are baffled by the way computers seem to work with respect to the filesystem (even if they aren't really aware that's the issue) and quite frankly most of the time I can fully see their point.

Open a Word attachment from Hotmail, for example and edit it. Then click save and watch as Word happily saves your hours of work. Now try and find it later on....

@DeathByVisualStudio: You're still thinking of them in terms of operations the user needs to do themselves, as opposed to things the system does for them.

@AndyC: No I'm not. As I said earlier...

The organization of user files is only as good as the app they are using. That's my whole point. Moving from file system to tags & search is just moving the problem. If the OS and app support & implementation isn't there those that rely on the computer organizing things for them are going to be just as lost.

It seems as though your assumption is that the system will organize their files for them. Search only works as well as the file is indexed. Countless times I've had to support users who can't find something on SharePoint because either they where not smart enough to pick the right search terms or there were too many documents returned based on their search scope. This only gets worse over time as documents accumulate in the data store.

Search and the file system are both useful tools for users to organize and find their files. I just don't think the OS and apps are smart enough to do away with folders just yet. It's kind of like saying we're ready to forgo the mouse and keyboard because Siri is so bitchin' It's great until that's all you have to get things done.

@DeathByVisualStudio: Sharepoint is little more than a filesystem in that regards, it suffers exactly the same issues that any generic, user managed hierarchical filestore suffers. The problems you're seeing with users being unable to find things there are exactly the ones I'm talking about.

When I archive my printed literature by scanning it into my computer, I need to have the current scans located in a folder separate from any other scans or items, because I need to stich multiple scans into one image. Without the current file system, this task would be very difficult to do.

I scan full magazines and place the images for each issue into its own folder. Many scanned items are one off topics and get tossed into general topic folders. The task of tagging comes later, if at all. I essentially scan so I can throw the physical hard copies out. I need to scan and archive items for research purposes and not because it is fun.

What I am getting at is that users will probably always need a file system plus folders and nested folders.

Anybody remember when Norton Desktop for Windows was an essential install after installing Windows?

I seem to recall there was no such thing as nested folders in early versions of Windows or some such thing.

@Proton2: Subfolders were introduced in DOS 2.0, iirc. Windows has always had them.

@Sven Groot: There was something missing from Windows that Norton provided that I just can't recall right now. It was a shell replacement that added functionality that was finally available in Windows 95, or something like that.

2 hours ago, Proton2 wrote

When I archive my printed literature by scanning it into my computer, I need to have the current scans located in a folder separate from any other scans or items, because I need to stich multiple scans into one image. Without the current file system, this task would be very difficult to do.

I scan full magazines and place the images for each issue into its own folder. Many scanned items are one off topics and get tossed into general topic folders. The task of tagging comes later, if at all. I essentially scan so I can throw the physical hard copies out. I need to scan and archive items for research purposes and not because it is fun.

What I am getting at is that users will probably always need a file system plus folders and nested folders.

Anybody remember when Norton Desktop for Windows was an essential install after installing Windows?

I seem to recall there was no such thing as nested folders in early versions of Windows or some such thing.

But then, what you really want isn't files and folders, is it? Those are just the only means to the end right now. What you really want is someting that lets you scan multiple images into a single magazine document, and since you are unable to do that, you have to fall back to multiple images in subfolders. If there were better scanning software, more suited to your needs, you could do away with the file system.

15 hours ago, AndyC wrote

@DeathByVisualStudio: Sharepoint is little more than a filesystem in that regards, it suffers exactly the same issues that any generic, user managed hierarchical filestore suffers. The problems you're seeing with users being unable to find things there are exactly the ones I'm talking about.

Oh I get it. You're talking about vaporware; where content is created and with no user education nor input files magically are available in the context the user wants them.

1 day ago, Proton2 wrote

When I archive my printed literature by scanning it into my computer, I need to have the current scans located in a folder separate from any other scans or items, because I need to stich multiple scans into one image. Without the current file system, this task would be very difficult to do.

I scan full magazines and place the images for each issue into its own folder. Many scanned items are one off topics and get tossed into general topic folders. The task of tagging comes later, if at all. I essentially scan so I can throw the physical hard copies out. I need to scan and archive items for research purposes and not because it is fun.

You don't need a file system, you need an intern.

18 hours ago, DeathByVisualStudio wrote

*snip*

Oh I get it. You're talking about vaporware; where content is created and with no user education nor input files magically are available in the context the user wants them.

Kind of how google works?