Re: Browse/Sort vs Index/Retrieve

3 Jul 2004 - 6:24pm
736 reads
Bruce Lieberman

>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
displayed returns.
(works real nice when I want to find collaborations, like Quincy Jones & ....)

Bottom line, neither approach is mutually exclusive nor should they be.

Have a Happy 4th everyone!


Syndicate content Get the feed