The right to Access the file system and organize my data.
suggested by Flick Harrison2013-10-11
Flick Harrison: Sandboxing will hinder creative re-purposing of project files.
Locking all your documents in app-specific interfaces prevents the serious user from managing projects in their own way.
Proprietary structures like the apple home folder hinder portability of a user's data.
Elimination of the finder / explorer altogether, as on tablets and phones, disempowers the user and creates a further gap between the user with computer literacy and the user without. This might even eliminate the power user and leave behind only the regular user and the programmer.
despens: Flick, what's wrong with the home folder? As far as I can tell, it works like a Unix home directory in the sense that all software stores their settings in there and it is easily portable to another Apple computer.
Flick Harrison: It is pretty portable to another Apple system, I agree. Never transferred a user folder except through Migration Assistant but it seems pretty cut and dried in theory.
The home folder isn't so bad but the constant attempt to save everything under "movies," "documents," "music," "pictures" must be chosen against every time the option comes up. Older apps default to where I've told them to, but newer apps increasingly default (unalterably) to the Mac naive-user organization, or, worse, to internal databases that will increasingly be inaccessible except through that app.
Why would I want to organize a media project for a high school under "movies," "documents," "music," and "pictures," when it contains all these? Should I make project folders under "documents?" Should I keyword everything and then have smart folders that more or less reliably turn up everything related to that project (along with however many false positives)?
So that's why I don't use it myself, others may obviously differ.
When I'm teaching, and I want students to save their work for posterity, to bring home to Windows or Android land, etc, they have to root through several places to find all their files and put them on a CD or USB stick. Modern apps like Photo Booth store their images in a database, which means you either dig through that or remember to open up every app you've used on that computer and copy it off.
I prefer them to have a folder on the desktop with their name on it, and save all their files there. Thus the output is "drag that folder to Toast, burn it, the end."
I mean, if you import videos into iphoto, those get stored in "pictures," not movies. You have to remember which program imported them in order to find them again - which seems like a distraction.
I mean, how do you organize projects on Android? Is Google Drive suitable for that?
Danja Vasiliev: it's probably related to how many abstractions shall UI or software be based up on. My vote is for less abstractions and more actual understanding of inner workings of the systems we use.
Flick Harrison: Sandboxing will hinder creative re-purposing of project files. Locking all your documents in app-specific interfaces prevents the serious user from managing projects in their own way. Proprietary structures like the apple home folder hinder portability of a user's data. Elimination of the finder / explorer altogether, as on tablets and phones, disempowers the user and creates a further gap between the user with computer literacy and the user without. This might even eliminate the power user and leave behind only the regular user and the programmer.
despens: Flick, what's wrong with the home folder? As far as I can tell, it works like a Unix home directory in the sense that all software stores their settings in there and it is easily portable to another Apple computer.
Flick Harrison: It is pretty portable to another Apple system, I agree. Never transferred a user folder except through Migration Assistant but it seems pretty cut and dried in theory. The home folder isn't so bad but the constant attempt to save everything under "movies," "documents," "music," "pictures" must be chosen against every time the option comes up. Older apps default to where I've told them to, but newer apps increasingly default (unalterably) to the Mac naive-user organization, or, worse, to internal databases that will increasingly be inaccessible except through that app. Why would I want to organize a media project for a high school under "movies," "documents," "music," and "pictures," when it contains all these? Should I make project folders under "documents?" Should I keyword everything and then have smart folders that more or less reliably turn up everything related to that project (along with however many false positives)? So that's why I don't use it myself, others may obviously differ. When I'm teaching, and I want students to save their work for posterity, to bring home to Windows or Android land, etc, they have to root through several places to find all their files and put them on a CD or USB stick. Modern apps like Photo Booth store their images in a database, which means you either dig through that or remember to open up every app you've used on that computer and copy it off. I prefer them to have a folder on the desktop with their name on it, and save all their files there. Thus the output is "drag that folder to Toast, burn it, the end." I mean, if you import videos into iphoto, those get stored in "pictures," not movies. You have to remember which program imported them in order to find them again - which seems like a distraction. I mean, how do you organize projects on Android? Is Google Drive suitable for that?
Danja Vasiliev: it's probably related to how many abstractions shall UI or software be based up on. My vote is for less abstractions and more actual understanding of inner workings of the systems we use.