6 ms·

It's one thing to have a persistent object store instead of a file system (as the Newton did). It's wholly another to have a file system at the core of your OS

It's one thing to have a persistent object store instead of a file system (as the Newton did). It's wholly another to have a file system at the core of your OS but just pretend it doesn't exist. That's a regressive obfuscation, not encapsulation. (Yes, I understand who the target audience is.)

mythz 11y ago
Apple's primary focus is on UX simplicity and Customers couldn't care less how it's implemented behind the scenes, they just want to get stuff done, find the Word document they were working on or see the Photo or Video they just took. The less Customers have to know about how technology works the happier they are, and the more successful Apple is.
- wwweston 11y ago
  The key part of that last statement is have to. You're right that as a matter of routine, having recent documents worked with in an app come up on opening it (and an easy visual list of all the files the app has touched) is a great interaction pattern. That says nothing about whether or not there should be some kind of file browser, or other means for users to become aware and able to interact with files outside an app. Particularly because at some point, single-app workflows hit their limits, and getting stuff done either becomes a matter of using multiple apps or waiting for an app to grow the new feature you need (the latter of which is not just getting stuff done). And I'm not just talking about Power Users -- I've seen this happen with my mom (proverbial disinterested computer user), who generally is quite happy to be completely unaware of the file system, but still periodically runs into corner cases where she needs to do something no single app will let her do (usually audio-file related). This all reminds me of the discussion around hiding URLs in browsers: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7677898 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7677898 For decades, we had a system where people who didn't care to pay any attention to URL bars could ignore them, and people who were incidentally curious could learn useful things by paying attention, people who needed to discover them could, and people found them regularly useful had them at the ready. Then somebody who got caught up in a shallow idea of simplicity that neglects utility and discoverability decided they'd make a UX change that was hostile to all of latter two groups. After all... the first group doesn't care, they just want to navigate the web and get stuff done. The right principle here is to make the simple case easy and obvious, and the more complex case discoverably possible.
  - mythz 11y ago
    No the key part is what target audience and use-cases are they optimizing for with each device. Do they want to create an experience that's so simple to use that they're enjoyed by both kids and non-technical grand parents, that's optimized for the most common everyday tasks, e.g browsing the web, shopping, reading news, books, taking photos, finding driving directions, writing emails, etc. Or do they want to offer a full Desktop OS that's suitable for everyone including devs and power users lets them run server software, multiple windows, anti virus software, network filesystems, development IDE's that enables them to build iOS Apps, etc. For those users they offer OSX on macbooks and iMac's and choose not to complicate their UX on their most popular computing platform - that's quickly becoming most of their Customers primary computing platform. It's Apple's felicitous focus on simplicity and Customer use-cases that's what's made them the most successful company in the world.
    - vezzy-fnord 11y ago
      I like how "multiple windows" is suddenly considered an advanced feature. You're confusing simplicity with ease of use. Adding a layer of indirection over the intrinsic file system is not simple, and even ease of use is debatable, since it creates an impedance mismatch by definition. Nor is there any reason to consider this a zero-sum game. Having advanced features does not deprive the common user of their comfort, as they will simply not make use of them. I'm of course not the target audience for iPads, but let's not fool ourselves into thinking they're anything but a toy. It takes something much more serious for a new computer generation to usurp its predecessor, and if mobile device manufacturers continue in this fashion, they might win only a technicality - market share. As opposed to the usual test of whether a platform is able to bootstrap its own system software, which iOS and Android emphatically cannot.
      - mythz 11y ago
        No I'm not confusing simplicity with ease of use, I'm referring to the simplicity from the users perspective (i.e. what matters most) which is the conceptual and cognitive overhead required for them to know to accomplish what they want to do. In the same way a GUI Desktop is simpler and more comfortable to use for most people than DOS or a single Google search box or voice input are simple enough for anyone to use despite the complexity they encapsulate. Apple starts from the user experience first and works their way back to the technology. Technology is just an obstacle in order for them to be able to accomplish their desired experiences, it's not something they put front-and-center or use it to limit or influence how and what features are implemented. Kids can use an iPad without ever needing to know what a File System is, there is no impedance mismatch to them, they're not spending their time thinking about how their multi-layered video that just created is physically stored and synced. They just use an App for a while, switch to other apps, then re-open their app when they want to continue working on it. Exposing internals like file-system layout means the OS is no longer managing the files, they need to cater for manipulations whilst still supporting transparent cloud backups and syncing, they need to design a completely different UI for power users with lots of features all working with multi-touch yet still have the features power users expect from a Desktop OS, e.g. downloads to be in a central "Downloads" folder instead of being grouped and isolated in the App that downloaded them. You've at least acknowledged you're not the iPad's primary audience but labelling it as just a toy means you've still failed to realize its appeal. Smart Phones and tablets are becoming the primary computing platform because they empower users to be able to do more, Apps are optimized around use-cases and tasks making them much easier and more enjoyable to use than Desktop software. I have a lot of anecdotal evidence on how the iPad is the only computing device my parents have ever enjoyed, how after so many years they still can't conceptualize how files and folders are structured, where their documents are saved, how full-screen windows and pop dialogs makes them think their PC is broken. Even myself as a power user I find lots of apps that are much better on an iPad, inc. more advanced tasks like browsing and comparing real-estate is so much faster and effortless. There's also tasks that you just can't do on a PC or are frustrating enough that you wouldn't bother with, e.g. Making phone or video calls, taking and sending photos, Live Directions and Traffic, paying for coffee, even core tasks like browsing photos, Facebook or the Internet are generally more enjoyable on an iPad. But ultimately anecdotal evidence is useless as everyone can provide their own to contradict them, the best indicator we have to go with is Sales and by this measure Apple's recent iOS strategy is a lot more fruitful then their decades old Desktop OS strategy - they have no reason to make iPad's more like OSX - they're reaching and empowering more people then they ever have, they're making the technology a transparent implementation detail so much so that iPads are often referred to as a magical pieces of glass.
- bad_user 11y ago
  You know, I've heard this argument on customers not caring about this or that oversimplification or about this or that restriction or about customizations or about poor grandmas and so forth. But you know, numbers don't lie. iOS is not the dominant design. And guess what I have on my Android? A file manager, going hand in hand with uTorrent and VLC. And guess how I'm copying music on my phone? It's not through iTunes, thank god for that. That said the iPad Pro is a device that intrigues me, since with the stylus and the keyboard if might actually be more useful than a paperstand.
  - gress 11y ago
    The numbers of android include huge numbers of unusable devices that exist to displace feature phones. Don't kid yourself about what this means.
    - prapam2 11y ago
      How are they unsuable?
      - gress 11y ago
        They are underpowered even for running android apps and are used almost exclusively as messaging devices.
        prapam2 11y ago
        And where are you getting the stat? Years ago maybe not these days. The newer $100 mobiles sometimes are way better then say 200-300 mobiles. And btw messaging would be a app. Nobody uses sms where i live. All are on whatsapp.
        gress 11y ago
        Remember - the discussion is about what platform is dominant. The fact that messaging is implemented an app doesn't change that. New developments occur on iOS first for a reason.
- untog 11y ago
  Say you're composing an e-mail and you want to attach a Word doc you downloaded - how do you do that on an iPad?
  - mythz 11y ago
    The functionality is available within the context of the feature you're using. If it's a Word document you open the document, click the share icon and click "Send Attachment". Apple's Pages also has a Share icon that even lets you easily convert to Word, PDF, or ePub format before sending. For attaching whilst composing an email in Gmail (what I use) there's an "Attach" icon that lets you attach photos or files from Google Drive. Whilst Apple's Mail lets you click the cursor on where you want to add the Photo/Video.
    - untog 11y ago
      And does that sound user friendly to you?
      - mythz 11y ago
        It's extremely intuitive, I didn't recall how to do any of them but I knew I'd be able to find out in the context of using each App.
        untog 11y ago
        Can those options reply to an existing email chain?
        mythz 11y ago
        The Mail App features can. If the feature was considered important enough to complicate the UI there'd be an option or optimized App for the task, otherwise no-one thought it was important or cared enough to support it.
        11y ago
- est 11y ago
  at the cost of interoperability. It's hard to impossible to transfer doc from app A to app B. You don't have a work flow or tool chain, you just have one mega app to do it all.

mythz 11y ago

Apple's primary focus is on UX simplicity and Customers couldn't care less how it's implemented behind the scenes, they just want to get stuff done, find the Word document they were working on or see the Photo or Video they just took. The less Customers have to know about how technology works the happier they are, and the more successful Apple is.

wwweston 11y ago
The key part of that last statement is have to. You're right that as a matter of routine, having recent documents worked with in an app come up on opening it (and an easy visual list of all the files the app has touched) is a great interaction pattern. That says nothing about whether or not there should be some kind of file browser, or other means for users to become aware and able to interact with files outside an app. Particularly because at some point, single-app workflows hit their limits, and getting stuff done either becomes a matter of using multiple apps or waiting for an app to grow the new feature you need (the latter of which is not just getting stuff done). And I'm not just talking about Power Users -- I've seen this happen with my mom (proverbial disinterested computer user), who generally is quite happy to be completely unaware of the file system, but still periodically runs into corner cases where she needs to do something no single app will let her do (usually audio-file related). This all reminds me of the discussion around hiding URLs in browsers: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7677898 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7677898 For decades, we had a system where people who didn't care to pay any attention to URL bars could ignore them, and people who were incidentally curious could learn useful things by paying attention, people who needed to discover them could, and people found them regularly useful had them at the ready. Then somebody who got caught up in a shallow idea of simplicity that neglects utility and discoverability decided they'd make a UX change that was hostile to all of latter two groups. After all... the first group doesn't care, they just want to navigate the web and get stuff done. The right principle here is to make the simple case easy and obvious, and the more complex case discoverably possible.
- mythz 11y ago
  No the key part is what target audience and use-cases are they optimizing for with each device. Do they want to create an experience that's so simple to use that they're enjoyed by both kids and non-technical grand parents, that's optimized for the most common everyday tasks, e.g browsing the web, shopping, reading news, books, taking photos, finding driving directions, writing emails, etc. Or do they want to offer a full Desktop OS that's suitable for everyone including devs and power users lets them run server software, multiple windows, anti virus software, network filesystems, development IDE's that enables them to build iOS Apps, etc. For those users they offer OSX on macbooks and iMac's and choose not to complicate their UX on their most popular computing platform - that's quickly becoming most of their Customers primary computing platform. It's Apple's felicitous focus on simplicity and Customer use-cases that's what's made them the most successful company in the world.
  - vezzy-fnord 11y ago
    I like how "multiple windows" is suddenly considered an advanced feature. You're confusing simplicity with ease of use. Adding a layer of indirection over the intrinsic file system is not simple, and even ease of use is debatable, since it creates an impedance mismatch by definition. Nor is there any reason to consider this a zero-sum game. Having advanced features does not deprive the common user of their comfort, as they will simply not make use of them. I'm of course not the target audience for iPads, but let's not fool ourselves into thinking they're anything but a toy. It takes something much more serious for a new computer generation to usurp its predecessor, and if mobile device manufacturers continue in this fashion, they might win only a technicality - market share. As opposed to the usual test of whether a platform is able to bootstrap its own system software, which iOS and Android emphatically cannot.
    - mythz 11y ago
      No I'm not confusing simplicity with ease of use, I'm referring to the simplicity from the users perspective (i.e. what matters most) which is the conceptual and cognitive overhead required for them to know to accomplish what they want to do. In the same way a GUI Desktop is simpler and more comfortable to use for most people than DOS or a single Google search box or voice input are simple enough for anyone to use despite the complexity they encapsulate. Apple starts from the user experience first and works their way back to the technology. Technology is just an obstacle in order for them to be able to accomplish their desired experiences, it's not something they put front-and-center or use it to limit or influence how and what features are implemented. Kids can use an iPad without ever needing to know what a File System is, there is no impedance mismatch to them, they're not spending their time thinking about how their multi-layered video that just created is physically stored and synced. They just use an App for a while, switch to other apps, then re-open their app when they want to continue working on it. Exposing internals like file-system layout means the OS is no longer managing the files, they need to cater for manipulations whilst still supporting transparent cloud backups and syncing, they need to design a completely different UI for power users with lots of features all working with multi-touch yet still have the features power users expect from a Desktop OS, e.g. downloads to be in a central "Downloads" folder instead of being grouped and isolated in the App that downloaded them. You've at least acknowledged you're not the iPad's primary audience but labelling it as just a toy means you've still failed to realize its appeal. Smart Phones and tablets are becoming the primary computing platform because they empower users to be able to do more, Apps are optimized around use-cases and tasks making them much easier and more enjoyable to use than Desktop software. I have a lot of anecdotal evidence on how the iPad is the only computing device my parents have ever enjoyed, how after so many years they still can't conceptualize how files and folders are structured, where their documents are saved, how full-screen windows and pop dialogs makes them think their PC is broken. Even myself as a power user I find lots of apps that are much better on an iPad, inc. more advanced tasks like browsing and comparing real-estate is so much faster and effortless. There's also tasks that you just can't do on a PC or are frustrating enough that you wouldn't bother with, e.g. Making phone or video calls, taking and sending photos, Live Directions and Traffic, paying for coffee, even core tasks like browsing photos, Facebook or the Internet are generally more enjoyable on an iPad. But ultimately anecdotal evidence is useless as everyone can provide their own to contradict them, the best indicator we have to go with is Sales and by this measure Apple's recent iOS strategy is a lot more fruitful then their decades old Desktop OS strategy - they have no reason to make iPad's more like OSX - they're reaching and empowering more people then they ever have, they're making the technology a transparent implementation detail so much so that iPads are often referred to as a magical pieces of glass.
bad_user 11y ago
You know, I've heard this argument on customers not caring about this or that oversimplification or about this or that restriction or about customizations or about poor grandmas and so forth. But you know, numbers don't lie. iOS is not the dominant design. And guess what I have on my Android? A file manager, going hand in hand with uTorrent and VLC. And guess how I'm copying music on my phone? It's not through iTunes, thank god for that. That said the iPad Pro is a device that intrigues me, since with the stylus and the keyboard if might actually be more useful than a paperstand.
- gress 11y ago
  The numbers of android include huge numbers of unusable devices that exist to displace feature phones. Don't kid yourself about what this means.
  - prapam2 11y ago
    How are they unsuable?
    - gress 11y ago
      They are underpowered even for running android apps and are used almost exclusively as messaging devices.
      - prapam2 11y ago
        And where are you getting the stat? Years ago maybe not these days. The newer $100 mobiles sometimes are way better then say 200-300 mobiles. And btw messaging would be a app. Nobody uses sms where i live. All are on whatsapp.
        gress 11y ago
        Remember - the discussion is about what platform is dominant. The fact that messaging is implemented an app doesn't change that. New developments occur on iOS first for a reason.
untog 11y ago
Say you're composing an e-mail and you want to attach a Word doc you downloaded - how do you do that on an iPad?
- mythz 11y ago
  The functionality is available within the context of the feature you're using. If it's a Word document you open the document, click the share icon and click "Send Attachment". Apple's Pages also has a Share icon that even lets you easily convert to Word, PDF, or ePub format before sending. For attaching whilst composing an email in Gmail (what I use) there's an "Attach" icon that lets you attach photos or files from Google Drive. Whilst Apple's Mail lets you click the cursor on where you want to add the Photo/Video.
  - untog 11y ago
    And does that sound user friendly to you?
    - mythz 11y ago
      It's extremely intuitive, I didn't recall how to do any of them but I knew I'd be able to find out in the context of using each App.
      - untog 11y ago
        Can those options reply to an existing email chain?
        mythz 11y ago
        The Mail App features can. If the feature was considered important enough to complicate the UI there'd be an option or optimized App for the task, otherwise no-one thought it was important or cared enough to support it.
        11y ago
est 11y ago
at the cost of interoperability. It's hard to impossible to transfer doc from app A to app B. You don't have a work flow or tool chain, you just have one mega app to do it all.