>http://www.wired.com/news/mac/0,2125,64069,00.html?tw=wn_tophead_4 > >the above article is about Steve Jobs' ascertion that browse/sort is old hat >and the future is search. > >I'd like to get other people's thoughts on this. > >I do think that sorting might be old hat, but there are other forms of >browse, or maybe I'm limiting my definition of search a bit. > >What comes to mind for me is that I like GMail's labels, but I seldom >search. I browse based on those labels. >Another example is the 40GB of music I have. I seldom search ... I browse. I >do sort my lists by album and artist, but I seldom use the text field to >enter data, click a button and hope for a sub-set of info. > >Search comes up a lot in what I do as someone who has been working in ECM >for a long time now, so I'm curious as to what other people think about the >IxD implications on this subject. > >-- dave
I'm HOPING that the other shoe in the new 'Spotlight' scheme is yet to drop :)
Knock on wood, that shoe will be a variation of the 'Piles' research
project that was done in the early 90's in Apple's ATG group (which they
patented in 2001).
It would be a perfect fit for the type of (meta-data inclusive) indexing
that Spotlight is supposed to do.
Sort/Browse is a deeply ingrained and useful approach for many tasks and
I can't see it disappearing anytime soon.
I'm impressed that you don't use searching in 40G of mp3's...
I'd think it would become vital with a domain that size.
In iTunes, there is no 'execute' function for the search, each character
you enter into the search field progressively/dynamically narrows the
(works real nice when I want to find collaborations, like Quincy Jones & ....)
Bottom line, neither approach is mutually exclusive nor should they be.