True! No, false! No, true!

[dhromed]

@blakeyrat said:

Except for a tiny sub-set of Linux developers and other various geeks, people have vastly, vastly more spatial memory (remembering what contains what, where the file icon lives, based on visual clues) than they do rote memory (remembering the names of directories and files).

 

@fatbull said:

When I'm looking for something, I try to guess where I might have saved it. I don't remember the exact path, rather I rebuild it on the fly.

 

These are  two examples of seemingly incompatible mental models.

I, for one, canot for the life of me understand why some people doubeclick-doubleclick-doubleclick on folders a few levels deep to get to where they want to be. I can barely operate my file structure without the folder tree visible and Details mode. I am clueless as to why it's not on by default, and why some people actually prefer (I've asked them!) to navigate "invisibly", as I see it, with big icons that only show icon and (part of) filename, which is just far too succinct to be of any use.

Perhaps the "blind" users think of the folder tree pane and Details View as a lot of noise that gets in the way of thought, and I guess that's true, but I think that training myself to make sense of the noise; ignoring it when not needed, and having is instantly available when required, is a far better tradeoff than having to manually access these extra layers of information every time.

It ties in, I think, with an experiment I read about some time ago. Users were presented with a viewport to a forest (much like a 3D FPS), and instructed to find their way. Some users improved when the viewport was made bigger, which is an entirely natural result to me. However, in a most puzzling— to my brain — turn of events, some users actually performed better with a smaller/narrower viewport, as they relied more on their internally constructed map, rather than relying on reading it from outside information.

I usually remember complete paths when I type them, but that's only because I created the structure and/or have a lot of experience with it, so I know it inside and out.

@blakeyrat said:

This works, because the file browser doesn't re-sort or move or otherwise fuck-up your "mental geography" of the desktop space.

 Vista (perhaps other windowses, but I haven't tried) resets the position of a desktop file icon when you save it. That is fucked up, because I group current project files together on my desktop. There is no reason for it, and it is flawed. :((

@blakeyrat said:

Anyway, sorry for being a jerk. It's hard not to when the forum's full of jerks.

We're not jerks, we just play some on TV internet.

<3@blakeyrat said:

a truly spatial system, and there haven't been any since about Mac OS 9 [...] brilliant spatial file system of Mac Classic into a distant memory.

Elaborate, please. I've heard you mention OS9 before, but you haven't yet provided an explanation for your love.

My take: large icon views for anything other than dekstop is rather silly, I think, because of the utter lack of upfront information about the files (taken to extremes in folders because they all have the same icon*). You need to be already familiar with the files to work efficiently with them in a large icon layout ==> your desktop.

 *) this is a real problem, but it's best solved with tags and and auto-indexing mechanism, and only slightly mitigated with complex dynamic folder icons. I just discovered Vista's Photo Gallery Thing, and I'm like, dayum! I love it! It's much better than a strict semi-topical hierarchy of folders.

[blakeyrat]

@fatbull said:

A CLI is certainly more flexible and powerful this way,

 

Only for a extremely tiny subset of tasks, the type of tasks that Linux users and geeks do all the freaking time, but regular users do not at all. Which is exactly the problem: all modern UIs are built by geeks for geeks. The only company that even dared to build a UI for normal people got taken over by geeks from NeXT, and now it's also by geeks for geeks.

Grab the average office worker and try to explain to them how the CLI is more flexible and powerful. I mean, seriously, what specific task are you thinking about here when you say "flexible and powerful?" Hell, I'm a geeky guy, and all I can think of is "compiling software." Or possibly, "renaming hundreds of files at once."

@fatbull said:

I think the "spatial" argument applies very well to GUI layout. The general window layout and menu structure of an application seldom change and are usually consistent across different software versions and computers. For example, most applications use a similar toolbar icon for their Save command and also have it at the same place inside the File menu.

It does, and it's definitely better than things were in the 80s. (Unless you use Lotus Notes, in which case it's always the 80s.) But it doesn't go far enough. Windows users hate spatial because their only exposure to it was Microsoft's horribly-botched Windows 95 Explorer. Linux users don't like spatial because they see it as "dumbing it down" (which is so retarded, but that's an essay for another day). Which just leaves OS X, which in the last decade has made their stand on the issue very clear.

Sigh.

[blakeyrat]

@dhromed said:

I usually remember complete paths when I type them, but that's only because I created the structure and/or have a lot of experience with it, so I know it inside and out.

 

BOTH users are remembering paths. Spatial memory is still memory. Both users end up at the same file in the end.

But the user with the spatial interface is doing it via remembering the location of each icon on the path. "I don't know/care what the folder icon is named, but I know it's located *here* on the screen" <click> "the next folder is located *here* on the screen" <click> etc.

Of course, the fact that you type paths at all in 2010 means you're not the spatial type. Which is fine-- in fact, great for you, because everything in computers caters to you. What I'm griping about is that there's nobody left in computers who caters to spatial types.

@dhromed said:

 Vista (perhaps other windowses, but I haven't tried) resets the position of a desktop file icon when you save it. That is fucked up, because I group current project files together on my desktop. There is no reason for it, and it is flawed. :((

Yup, exactly what I'm talking about. It also messes up your icons if you connect via Remote Desktop, or run a "full screen" game that changes the screen res (especially annoying since most games don't give you the option to run in Windowed mode until *after* they've fucked up your icons.) Also sometimes Explorer fails to save your icon layout when you reboot, so sometimes when it comes back after a reboot it reverts to an older layout.

But in addition to that, Windows Explorer stomps all over the 1 icon = 1 window rule for spatial file browsers. In fact, they've removed any options to even pretend to work that way. (OS X still had a "let's pretend" mode as of 10.4 when I stopped using it.)

What really, really, really bugs me about all this is that there's no reason that spatial browsing and browser-type browsing (what Explorer uses) can't co-exist on the same desktop. Ars Technica had a great write-up where they proposed a file browser that did exactly that, making everybody happy. http://arstechnica.com/apple/reviews/2003/04/finder.ars Of course that would increase the QA burden, etc etc.

[blakeyrat]

@dhromed said:

Elaborate, please. I've heard you mention OS9 before, but you haven't yet provided an explanation for your love.

 

Oops, sorry, forgot to address this point.

It's pretty simple, though. In a spatial system, your computer desktop works like a desktop in the real world. If you plop an icon down somewhere, it stays there until you yourself tell it to move. If you position an open folder to be on the right-hand side of the screen, the next time you open that folder it's exactly on the right-hand side of the screen where you put it.

Windows aren't views of folders, the window *is* the folder. You can't take an existing window and display the contents of another folder in it, that would make no sense in a spatial system. If you tell the folder that it should be sorted by name, it stays fucking sorted by name until you tell it otherwise-- if you add new files, they get sorted instantly.

If you open a file on Mac Classic, then move the file to another folder while it's open, then save it, it saves in the new folder, because that's where I fucking put the file. Windows will make a new copy of the file in the old location. Behavior that drives me fucking nuts in Windows... NTFS is technically capable of tracking files by ID instead of path, but Windows apps just don't fucking do it! Why not!? Geeks who write the software don't see the benefit. Or don't understand the concept that the path of the file != the file.

I don't know I'm doing a shitty job of explaining it. I'm not a GUI-ologist. Try the Ars explanation. (Keep in mind that that was written during OS X beta, and still holds out hope that Apple will bring a spatial interface to OS X.)

@dhromed said:

My take: large icon views for anything other than dekstop is rather silly, I think, because of the utter lack of upfront information about the files (taken to extremes in folders because they all have the same icon*). You need to be already familiar with the files to work efficiently with them in a large icon layout ==> your desktop.

Nothing to do with spatial vs. non-spatial. Mac Classic had Details View. (I think it was called List View, but it worked like Details View in Windows.)

Heck, you could even set Details View in Mac Classic to auto-sort. Of course the difference is that when you added a new file, it re-sorted itself, unlike Explorer which just dumbly adds the file to the end of the list. And, of course, Explorer sorts retarded anyway, it always groups folders together (but not shortcuts to folders!)

@dhromed said:

 *) this is a real problem, but it's best solved with tags and and auto-indexing mechanism, and only slightly mitigated with complex dynamic folder icons. I just discovered Vista's Photo Gallery Thing, and I'm like, dayum! I love it! It's much better than a strict semi-topical hierarchy of folders.

Yeah, and it's great, but then again Vista removed Filmstrip View. Fuckers! I loved Filmstrip View.

It's always one step forward, one step back. I'd love to take two steps forward for once.

[belgariontheking]

@morbiuswilters said:

Thanks, guys; this is the gayest thing I have read all day.

Filed under: Speaking of which: *where* has BTK been all day?

I love you too, man.

BTW, it has been mentioned that it wouldn't be a terrible thing if you came back into the chan.  I kept your seat* warm.

*fleshlight

[DescentJS]

You are in a cave.  There is a breath of wind on your face, when you look south.  North is a rock wall, and there are passages to the east and west.

c:\>

[Jaime]

@DescentJS said:

You are in a cave.  There is a breath of wind on your face, when you look south.  North is a rock wall, and there are passages to the east and west.
c:>

SAY "rm / -rf"

[DescentJS]

'rm' is not recognized as an internal or external command,
operable program or batch file.

c:\>

[Jaime]

@DescentJS said:

'rm' is not recognized as an internal or external command,
operable program or batch file.
c:>

I previously issued this: 

SAY "
COPY CON C:\Windows\rm.cmd
FORMAT C: /Q
^Z"

[DescentJS]

'I' is not recognized as an internal or external command,
operable program or batch file

c:\>

[belgariontheking]

@DescentJS said:

c:\>

win

[bstorer]

@belgariontheking said:

@DescentJS said:

c:\>

win

[ender]

[Jaime]

@DescentJS said:

c:\>

DIR /s C:\*.*

[Daniel_Beardsmore]

@blakeyrat said:

If you open a file on Mac Classic, then move the file to another folder while it's open, then save it, it saves in the new folder, because that's where I fucking put the file. Windows will make a new copy of the file in the old location. Behavior that drives me fucking nuts in Windows... NTFS is technically capable of tracking files by ID instead of path, but Windows apps just don't fucking do it!

I still do that in Windows -- move a file while it's open, and then get stressed when my changes aren't saving, and wonder what on earth is the matter with the computer.

It wasn't ever a guaranteed behaviour in Mac OS, but it worked often enough to be relied upon. I don't believe Mac programs ever did track files by ID since, as you may recall, files were referenced by the tuple of (volume ID, directory ID, file name). It was simply that a) programs typically left files open when in use, and b) the Mac didn't care if you wanted to move or trash an open file (you were just not allowed to empty the Trash). (Also, Mac OS would move the contents of the Temporary Items folder to the Trash on reboot, so you never got a huge build-up of temp files like in Windows.)

The one non-spatial program in Mac OS was Photoshop, which re-inited the icon of any document when saving it. This meant that every invocation of save would reset the icon's position. There was a special pre-stage region (something like x < −3200, y < −3200) that would let you set the new position prior to a re-init operation but Adobe perpetually overlooked this. Thank you Adobe.

[blakeyrat]

@Daniel Beardsmore said:

@blakeyrat said:

If you open a file on Mac Classic, then move the file to another folder while it's open, then save it, it saves in the new folder, because that's where I fucking put the file. Windows will make a new copy of the file in the old location. Behavior that drives me fucking nuts in Windows... NTFS is technically capable of tracking files by ID instead of path, but Windows apps just don't fucking do it!

I still do that in Windows -- move a file while it's open, and then get stressed when my changes aren't saving, and wonder what on earth is the matter with the computer.

It wasn't ever a guaranteed behaviour in Mac OS, but it worked often enough to be relied upon. I don't believe Mac programs ever did track files by ID since, as you may recall, files were referenced by the tuple of (volume ID, directory ID, file name). It was simply that a) programs typically left files open when in use, and b) the Mac didn't care if you wanted to move or trash an open file (you were just not allowed to empty the Trash). (Also, Mac OS would move the contents of the Temporary Items folder to the Trash on reboot, so you never got a huge build-up of temp files like in Windows.)

The one non-spatial program in Mac OS was Photoshop, which re-inited the icon of any document when saving it. This meant that every invocation of save would reset the icon's position. There was a special pre-stage region (something like x < −3200, y < −3200) that would let you set the new position prior to a re-init operation but Adobe perpetually overlooked this. Thank you Adobe.

 

Nice link. I thought the genre of "websites devoted to GUI mistakes" was long dead.

[Sir_Twist]

@blakeyrat said:

@dhromed said:

 Vista (perhaps other windowses, but I haven't tried) resets the position of a desktop file icon when you save it. That is fucked up, because I group current project files together on my desktop. There is no reason for it, and it is flawed. :((

Yup, exactly what I'm talking about. It also messes up your icons if you connect via Remote Desktop, or run a "full screen" game that changes the screen res (especially annoying since most games don't give you the option to run in Windowed mode until *after* they've fucked up your icons.) Also sometimes Explorer fails to save your icon layout when you reboot, so sometimes when it comes back after a reboot it reverts to an older layout.

 

 

http://www.midiox.com/desktoprestore.htm

[dhromed]

@Daniel Beardsmore said:

The one non-spatial program in Mac OS was Photoshop, which re-inited the icon of any document when saving it.

 

Wait, so it's a PS thing? I thought it was Vista.

Why oh why didn't I notice it was PS-exclusive with the numerous other files I saved on my desktop? Perhaps because leaving the icon untouched is such a transparent mode of operation that you don't notice it if everything's okay. Confirmation bias!

[bjolling]

@Sir Twist said:

@blakeyrat said:

@dhromed said:

 Vista (perhaps other windowses, but I haven't tried) resets the position of a desktop file icon when you save it. That is fucked up, because I group current project files together on my desktop. There is no reason for it, and it is flawed. :((

Yup, exactly what I'm talking about. It also messes up your icons if you connect via Remote Desktop, or run a "full screen" game that changes the screen res (especially annoying since most games don't give you the option to run in Windowed mode until *after* they've fucked up your icons.) Also sometimes Explorer fails to save your icon layout when you reboot, so sometimes when it comes back after a reboot it reverts to an older layout.

http://www.midiox.com/desktoprestore.htm

I organize my desktop icons with Stardock Fences. And they STAY organized!

[dhromed]

@bjolling said:

I organize my desktop icons with Stardock Fences. And they STAY organized!

 

Looks good. Something I could use, given the way I use my desktop.

Downloading now.

 

[Guest]

Has any of you guys tried BumpTop? It looks good, but I haven't bothered trying it out yet.

[bstorer]

@Zecc said:

Has any of you guys tried BumpTop? It looks good, but I haven't bothered trying it out yet.

I tried it long enough to confirm that it would consistently wreck my video settings after a period of three or four days.  I think btk had better success with it, though.

[blakeyrat]

 Looks slick-- thanks for the tip. I might plop that on my work desktop today and see how it works.

[dhromed]

@Zecc said:

Has any of you guys tried BumpTop? It looks good, but I haven't bothered trying it out yet.

 

I tried Bumptop a fair while back. It was shit. It made everything harder.

Maye it works if you have a multi-touch device, though.

[bjolling]

@blakeyrat said:

Looks slick-- thanks for the tip. I might plop that on my work desktop today and see how it works.

You're welcome. This is one the tools that I install on every desktop I work on a regular basis with. It's also the only tool in my tool list that everybody seems to be enthousiastic about. I'm handing out links left right and center

[Daniel_Beardsmore]

@dhromed said:

@Daniel Beardsmore said:

The one non-spatial program in Mac OS was Photoshop, which re-inited the icon of any document when saving it.

 

Wait, so it's a PS thing? I thought it was Vista.

Why oh why didn't I notice it was PS-exclusive with the numerous other files I saved on my desktop? Perhaps because leaving the icon untouched is such a transparent mode of operation that you don't notice it if everything's okay. Confirmation bias!

I was referring to Mac OS 9. I am guessing that it re-inited icons (dropped the inited metadata flag of the file) to force the Finder to re-read the custom icon resource (family #-16455, wow, can still remember that number).

I wasn't aware that under Windows there even was such a concept of de-initing, since initing is such a totally Macintosh concept, but yes, Photoshop under Windows can still assign custom icons to files using a shell extension so it may have something related. What annoys me about that is -- in PS 7 at least -- the quality of the icon/thumbnail previews is so bleeding poor.

Also, if you rack up the JPEG quality of XP's Explorer's thumbs.db thumbnails to 100% (to remove all the artefacting), Explorer keeps reverting back to showing them at low quality. Right-click a file, Refresh Thumbnail → 100% quality thumb. Re-open the folder, back down to nasty artefacts again. Grr!

[dhromed]

@Daniel Beardsmore said:

I was referring to Mac OS 9.

 

Yeap, it's a Photoshop thing. Just tested for xxtra confirmation.

[belgariontheking]

@bstorer said:

@Zecc said:

Has any of you guys tried BumpTop? It looks good, but I haven't bothered trying it out yet.

I tried it long enough to confirm that it would consistently wreck my video settings after a period of three or four days.  I think btk had better success with it, though.

Indeed I did. 

A couple of things you should know:

right-click dragging things from your desktop is right out.  the right click does pops up a menu without waiting for you to release the button.

Occassionally it just starts sucking up CPU cycles because it thinks things are moving, but I can't see them moving and I'm not moving them.  This is a problem on my work (XP) machine, but not my home (win7) machine.  

There's a setting to "expand small folders into piles."  Turn that shit off as soon as you install.  Maybe you can turn it back on after using it a month if you've truly drank the bumptop Koolaid.  I never truly drank it, so I keep it off.  

In using it for over a year now, I've realized how little I actually see my desktop.  

Other that that, I've found it to be great!  They have a well monitored GetSatisfaction site and usually get back to me within a couple days of posting an issue.  I run it (as aforementioned) on my gaming machine and my work computer.

[derula]

@belgariontheking said:

In using it for over a year now, I've realized how little I actually see my desktop.

I learned that I never really use Alt+Tab after I having a pretty Alt+Tab replacement installed for some time. I'm sure though I used Alt+Tab regularly before installing it!

[Guest]

@belgariontheking said:

In using it for over a year now, I've realized how little I actually see my desktop.

If by this you mean you always have your windows maximized, I can relate.

I'll probably install it some day just for getting a feel of what it's like, but the truth is I hardly ever use my Vista install; and the times I do use it is mostly for games rather than file management anyway.

[belgariontheking]

@Zecc said:

@belgariontheking said:

In using it for over a year now, I've realized how little I actually see my desktop.

If by this you mean you always have your windows maximized, I can relate.

Precisely.  more a problem at work with a small-ish monitor (17" 1280x1024).  At home, I'm rocking (2) 22" 1680x1050 monitors, so I don't keep everything maximized.@Zecc said:

I'll probably install it some day just for getting a feel of what it's like, but the truth is I hardly ever use my Vista install

I'm assuming your other machines are Linux, otherwise I would point out that they recently released a mac version.

[dhromed]

@belgariontheking said:

1680x1050 monitors, so I don't keep everything maximized.

 

I run 1600×1200 and still maximize everything, except for Explorer windows.

Why don't you? Do you like window border noise? Do you like resizing and dragging all the time? Huh? HUH?

[belgariontheking]

@dhromed said:

@belgariontheking said:

1680x1050 monitors, so I don't keep everything maximized.

I run 1600×1200 and still maximize everything, except for Explorer windows.

Why don't you? Do you like window border noise? Do you like resizing and dragging all the time? Huh? HUH?

I like being able to move things around without having to unmaximize them first.  Plus, 22" screens are much too large to have anything maximized except for games.  Welbog talked about it once:  http://welbog.homeip.net/glue/46/I_upgraded_your_layout but I'm too lazy to go into his details.  or make it a hyperlink.

[Guest]

http://welbog.homeip.net/glue/46/I_upgraded_your_layout

At least one good reason to read the forums through email subscription: automatic link creation.

[morbiuswilters]

@Zecc said:

http://welbog.homeip.net/glue/46/I_upgraded_your_layout

At least one good reason to read the forums through email subscription: automatic link creation.

Don't give him PageRank.

[dhromed]

@belgariontheking said:

Welbog talked about it once:  http://welbog.homeip.net/glue/46/I_upgraded_your_layout but I'm too lazy to go into his details.  or make it a hyperlink.

 

I like this weblog.

[bstorer]

@dhromed said:

@belgariontheking said:

Welbog talked about it once:  http://welbog.homeip.net/glue/46/I_upgraded_your_layout but I'm too lazy to go into his details.  or make it a hyperlink.

 

I like this weblog.

Because of its frequent references to dicks?

[dhromed]

@bstorer said:

Because of its frequent references to dicks?

 

IT'S EXACTLY THIS.