4 ms·

A high percentages of users don't and never did understand file trees and how to navigate them. They find their files by rote repetition and spatial memory. Thi

A high percentages of users don't and never did understand file trees and how to navigate them. They find their files by rote repetition and spatial memory. This is how people end up with desktops covered in files and directories—that's how they find stuff, and the notion you can start in one of those directories and move around until you're in one of their other on-the-desktop directories is foreign. It "is" in a particular place on their desktop, in their mind.

ourmandave 4y ago
I've had users get completely lost when their screen res changed and all the icons got rearranged.
None4U 4y ago
I don't think so, everyone I know can use "ls" and "cd" and has Show Desktop Icons off (if using Windows)
- corrral 4y ago
  Then you only know power users and computer geeks.
jodrellblank 4y ago
I did and do understand file trees and how to navigate them, and I think they aren't good. They are a carryover from the physical world of "a place for everything and everything in its place" which means you need to remember which room and cupboard and shelf everything is, go there, open the cupboard, and get it. In a computer, it can be "anything you want appears wherever you are, when you need it". This is hugely more convenient. Let the computer deal with storage (and versioning) similar to garbage collection dealing with memory management. Locate on Linux and VoidTools Everything on Windows let you conjour things up without caring where they were stored, and increasingly photo libraries let you search by the content of pictures rather than the filename. Full-text search is also imaginable although on Windows it's not been good enough to use for years. The idea that the ever-growing list of things I use a computer for should take an ever-growing amount of space in my head to remember where everything is, is a bad idea. "Everything" tells me my comptuer has roughly 1.4 million files; most of them were put there by installers, not directly by me. If I can not-care about the location and storage of ~99% of them, why can't I not-care about the storage arrangement of 100% of them?
- trasz 4y ago
  >If I can not-care about the location and storage of ~99% of them, why can't I not-care about the storage arrangement of 100% of them? Because this 1% are files that actually matter.
eloisius 4y ago
There's always a more ignorant user. I don't find this argument persuasive. The non-filesystem-centric data storage systems I'm familiar with are far worse. Instead of portable files which you can do with as you please, you're confined to preconceived integrations that developers thought of, like iPhone apps that let you "share" information with other apps.
newsclues 4y ago
Computer education (and educators) are often terrible. I think there is a large part of certain generations who were taught poorly by people who didn’t like or understand computers, so it’s not surprising that people that have poor education have poor understanding of computers.

ourmandave 4y ago

I've had users get completely lost when their screen res changed and all the icons got rearranged.

None4U 4y ago

I don't think so, everyone I know can use "ls" and "cd" and has Show Desktop Icons off (if using Windows)

corrral 4y ago
Then you only know power users and computer geeks.

jodrellblank 4y ago

I did and do understand file trees and how to navigate them, and I think they aren't good. They are a carryover from the physical world of "a place for everything and everything in its place" which means you need to remember which room and cupboard and shelf everything is, go there, open the cupboard, and get it. In a computer, it can be "anything you want appears wherever you are, when you need it". This is hugely more convenient. Let the computer deal with storage (and versioning) similar to garbage collection dealing with memory management. Locate on Linux and VoidTools Everything on Windows let you conjour things up without caring where they were stored, and increasingly photo libraries let you search by the content of pictures rather than the filename. Full-text search is also imaginable although on Windows it's not been good enough to use for years. The idea that the ever-growing list of things I use a computer for should take an ever-growing amount of space in my head to remember where everything is, is a bad idea. "Everything" tells me my comptuer has roughly 1.4 million files; most of them were put there by installers, not directly by me. If I can not-care about the location and storage of ~99% of them, why can't I not-care about the storage arrangement of 100% of them?

trasz 4y ago
>If I can not-care about the location and storage of ~99% of them, why can't I not-care about the storage arrangement of 100% of them? Because this 1% are files that actually matter.

eloisius 4y ago

There's always a more ignorant user. I don't find this argument persuasive. The non-filesystem-centric data storage systems I'm familiar with are far worse. Instead of portable files which you can do with as you please, you're confined to preconceived integrations that developers thought of, like iPhone apps that let you "share" information with other apps.

newsclues 4y ago

Computer education (and educators) are often terrible. I think there is a large part of certain generations who were taught poorly by people who didn’t like or understand computers, so it’s not surprising that people that have poor education have poor understanding of computers.