3 ms·

Exactly. Who the hell writes this? I'm 15 years old, possibly part of the "generation" this author is referring to, and I do not want my information stored on r

by kunai 13y ago

Exactly. Who the hell writes this? I'm 15 years old, possibly part of the "generation" this author is referring to, and I do not want my information stored on remote servers that I have to access with high-latency and low-throughput connections. I do not want to launch an app to find one file I can get to easily with search. I do not want a curated application experience. All these things should be reserved for auxiliary machines like tablets. On a general-purpose computing device such as a laptop or desktop PC, I do think that file hierarchies will be deprecated, but they won't die completely. Search will be king on the desktop, and eventually will integrate both locally and remotely on the Web. Cloud computing's uptake upshoot is ephemeral. Once it's gained as much ground as it has to, the growth rate will stagnate and the cloud will plateau. I don't see SaaS being successful much either.

dclusin 13y ago
It seems like there is still hope for the younger generations. Says the 28 year old.
zanny 13y ago
Of note, even if you store your information remotely, it still makes more sense to organize it in a file system. That photo app is best done with folders and hierarchies, you organize your email in the same way, discrete information is best organized in groups, and that is all a filesystem is.
- JamisonM 13y ago
  I emphatically disagree on the photo app example. The only folders I use for my photos is by date and the only reason I do so is because of the limitations of the design of the computer on which those files are stored. Photos do not particularly lend themselves to hierarchies - one person's "Family and Friends" grouping might be arbitrary to someone else, that's why tags came along - they add information instead of putting items in silos.
  - andrewflnr 13y ago
    I hope what makes the traditional filesystem obsolete is something with better support for non-treeish data, including tags.
    - ori_b 13y ago
      A tag based file systems are equivalent to a hierarchy with symlinks (or directory hard links). If you don't allow tagging of tags, it's equivalent to restricting your hierarchy to one level. Tags and directory DAGs are the same.
      - andrewflnr 13y ago
        True. Maybe we just need better interfaces for managing multiply-referenced files.

by kunai 13y ago

dclusin 13y ago

It seems like there is still hope for the younger generations. Says the 28 year old.

zanny 13y ago

Of note, even if you store your information remotely, it still makes more sense to organize it in a file system. That photo app is best done with folders and hierarchies, you organize your email in the same way, discrete information is best organized in groups, and that is all a filesystem is.

JamisonM 13y ago
I emphatically disagree on the photo app example. The only folders I use for my photos is by date and the only reason I do so is because of the limitations of the design of the computer on which those files are stored. Photos do not particularly lend themselves to hierarchies - one person's "Family and Friends" grouping might be arbitrary to someone else, that's why tags came along - they add information instead of putting items in silos.
- andrewflnr 13y ago
  I hope what makes the traditional filesystem obsolete is something with better support for non-treeish data, including tags.
  - ori_b 13y ago
    A tag based file systems are equivalent to a hierarchy with symlinks (or directory hard links). If you don't allow tagging of tags, it's equivalent to restricting your hierarchy to one level. Tags and directory DAGs are the same.
    - andrewflnr 13y ago
      True. Maybe we just need better interfaces for managing multiply-referenced files.