. So hide it as a power user feature, don't disable it. Clear anti-competitive agenda there masquerading as usability.
Conversation
Replying to
Tenuous conclusion. Understanding that file systems are problematic metaphors predates current app phenomenon by decades.
1
Replying to
. I find it highly suspicious when "good UX" so obviously favors a business model. The filesystem metaphor can be 100x better
2
1
Replying to
. The problem is there is no good incentive to improve the filesystem metaphor beyond DOS era levels. Doesn't mean it's "bad"
1
1
Replying to
. Incredibly patronizing to assume that because users found v 1 from 1988 difficult, they will never find it easy
2
Replying to
Many subsequent attempts were made: Cairo, Pink… yet none took. I'm utterly failing to see economically driven conspiracy.
2
Replying to
Umm. Of course it will fail if it goes against business model grain. Dropbox succeeded where CMS/Sharepoint type thinking ruled
2
Replying to
Dropbox succeeds for many reasons. When I see it used collaboratively, flatness prevails. Human mem associative, not hier, after all.
1
1
Replying to
agreed. I mean filesystem as V 1 of path of dev that includes these evolved species that preserve open data exchange/movement
1
Replying to
Maybe. You've yet to convince me that hierarchical metaphors (eg FSes) aren't orthogonal to the free data question.
1
Replying to
I think we're confusing horizontal and hierarchical. I like filesystems as an instance of a horizontal architecture element
Replying to
OK, I *think* I can get behind that, but warrants further thought.
1

