Would you benefit from file manager on your Kobo reader?

[rem736]

Originally Posted by moffattm

I'd be so disappointed with Kobo if they replaced the current system with a file browser. In my opinion a file browser is the lazy way of presenting things.

i think that the request is for a file browser in addition to the current system. i agree that to replace it is not a good idea.

[speakingtohe]

I have nothing against folders, but I am happy with shelves/collections on all of my readers except Kobo.

I probably wouldn't use folders much on a reader because it is touch screen with a small screen, and basically a single use device for me. And I don't want to have to type stuff in on a touch screen unless I have too

Still it should not be a big deal for one of the companies like Sony or Amazon to incorporate an experimental file browser or build it into the web browser and you will hear no squawks from me if they do unless they took away collections.

BTW my tablet does not have a real built in file browser either. I have a 3rd party one on it which I seldom use, but it is nice to know I have it if I need it of course. But I don't actually need it AFAIK.

I understand that those who have grown accustomed to one way of organising their books, cumbersome or not are reluctant to abandon something that they have been doing for years and years, but as a person who started out on CPM and Unix, I have long ago learned that being set in my ways is not going to convince anyone that my way is the best way, and just puts me behind the times.

Still the programming required to put in a file browser is not rocket science and would have no real detrimental effect except to allow more user error, but we are used to that

Still the major ereader developers seem adamant in their refusal to do this, so I don't see it happening this year anyway. (famous last words)

Helen

[parkher]

You don't have to type anything on touch screen to use folders. Just navigate.
Of course, hardware buttons (for page up/page down functionality) would be great for that purpose. But at Kobo they forgot that it is an e-ink device, not really suitable for scrolling/dragging. So at least buttons on the screen are needed.

As to Sony incorporating a file browser - yes, they already did!
Good people helped them out against their will

[speakingtohe]

Originally Posted by parkher

You don't have to type anything on touch screen to use folders. Just navigate.
Of course, hardware buttons (for page up/page down functionality) would be great for that purpose. But at Kobo they forgot that it is an e-ink device, not really suitable for scrolling/dragging. So at least buttons on the screen are needed.

As to Sony incorporating a file browser - yes, they already did!
Good people helped them out against their will

I know abut the Sony Root and I just don't feel I need it. I put Android on my non-android tablet, and have various OS /emulators on my Desktop, but I personally do not see the need for third party software on my Sony's. Kobo maybe a different story, but I will probably just get rid of the Kobos eventually.

Helen

[parkher]

speakingtohe
come on, it is getting off topic here, but T2 with AMR is probably the best 6" reader in the world and not rooted T2 - not worth having for free - in that case a better choice is probably one of Onyx Boox readers - they at least run Cool Reader and FBReader natively.

I am saying so because on T2 I never even leave CR3 - it is for me like OS, really.
And I have .nomedia in the root folder of my books, so Sony native indexing is completely off.
When I gave my CR settings to a friend, he got into a fight with his wife and they urgently bought another T2. Before that, just one was more than enough.

But really, rooted T2 has a number of other important advantages even besides CR.

Yes, definitely off topic, sorry. I need something about Aura HD here to finish.
I am thinking about ordering the brown one. Is it a good choice?

[mr_nihilism]

I'll just let my vote do the talking...

[speakingtohe]

Originally Posted by parkher

speakingtohe
come on, it is getting off topic here, but T2 with AMR is probably the best 6" reader in the world and not rooted T2 - not worth having for free - in that case a better choice is probably one of Onyx Boox readers - they at least run Cool Reader and FBReader natively.

I am saying so because on T2 I never even leave CR3 - it is for me like OS, really.
And I have .nomedia in the root folder of my books, so Sony native indexing is completely off.
When I gave my CR settings to a friend, he got into a fight with his wife and they urgently bought another T2. Before that, just one was more than enough.

But really, rooted T2 has a number of other important advantages even besides CR.

Yes, definitely off topic, sorry. I need something about Aura HD here to finish.
I am thinking about ordering the brown one. Is it a good choice?

Ha ha. Still don't need it as I don't have a wife

I bought the black one because It matches all of the other black things I own The Onyx is kind of maroon colour and I don't generally do maroon.

Helen

[parkher]

I've seen only pictures and to me that Espresso brown looks very dark but slightly greenish brown, like old moss, not reddish as chestnuts (i.e, maroons) are.
I kind of like it. But in reality it might look differently. Black is safe - you know what you get.

Would I like a file manager on my reader? Yes. I am more comfortable with navigating through file system. I am also more comfortable with storing documents in a file system because I understand what's going on at that level. The file system + database model always leave me wondering if the database is modified accordingly when I move or remove files, how data is stored in relation to other data within the database, and how to make desired modifications to the database itself.

Would I benefit from a file manager on my reader? Probably not. The existing shell allows me to find books based upon a number of criteria, and sometimes does so better than a file manager could. The shell also allows me to do the only file system operation that matters (i.e. deleting a book when I'm done) and it allows me to modify the portions of the database that matter (e.g. marking a book as read and storing annotations). The only drawback is browsing large numbers of books, but I don't keep large numbers of books on my reader anyhow.

Should Kobo implement this feature? It really depends upon who Kobo is targeting. In Canada, it is seen as a mass market product that is used by the general population. For Canada, implementing a file manager would probably be a bad idea because it would make the product more complex and less desirable. (In case technophiles haven't noticed it, the average user of consumer electronics wants a simple product and rarely goes beyond basic customization.) In other markets, I'm thinking that the perception of Kobo is different because it's a niche product that is bought by consumers who do more research before purchasing and may be looking for certain features. I'm guessing that the whole file manager thing can go either way in those markets.

[DNSB]

Originally Posted by parkher

As to the inefficiency of folders as the way of organizing books - maybe so, but with huge numbers of books it is a fast ant simple way. It does not require importing books into Calibre. Besides, it is not clear how many books Calibre can really handle before choking.
And in a case of multi-author series etc, I add "see there" instead of an actual book several times. It is really no big deal to get to the book. If you have a file manager, that is .

Calibre can go well over 30,000 books without any noticeable issues. One of my acquaintance's subset of his collection of Gutenberg harvest downloads was about that many books when he sucked them into Calibre for easier management. The joy of wget as he grabbed as the English language files from Gutenberg.

As for a file manager on the Kobo? I find that search is much easier to use as it takes me much fewer taps/swipes to find a specific book. I cleanup the metadata and run the epubs through Flightcrew (inside of Sigil) and epubcheck before sending them to the Kobo. So I have series, author(s) and title information easily searchable. A search on a series name returns all books in the series, a search on a book title returns that book, a search on an author name returns all books for which author, co-author or editor matches. And all with many fewer screen taps than are required to dig down through a directory structure -- 3 to 4 characters in the search field often has the result I am looking for in the first page of results shown as I type.

For example, I am trying to find a book in the 1632 series but it does not show under the name of the major author as I dig down through the directory structure on my hard drive.

On the Kobo, I have most of the Ring of Fire series. I can search by series (Ring Of Fire) or 163 (all the books in the major series start with 163x as the year they are set in). I type in ring, get ring of fire as the first result, select that and the first page of results has 1635 - The Tangled Web by Virginia DeMarce (total 9 taps on the screen). Search by 16 gives me multiple pages of results with the second page having the result I wanted (total 9 taps and a swipe on the screen). Of those taps, 4 were to bring up the search bar and select library since I was not on the home screen when I started the search.

If I want to find a book by Thorne Smith, entering tho on the search bar has Thorne Smith as the 6th item on the displayed search results, another tap on that and I have his 9 books on my Kobo on the two pages displayed. Plus a item claiming the Kobo bookstore has 34 matching items.

To me this is much easier than digging down the directory tree as I have my library structured on my hard drive. Especially when you are not sure about the name of the author, book title, etc.

If someone wants a file browser and Kobo implements it, I have no problem with that. OTOH, I'd rather Kobo spent their time/money on correcting existing problems than on adding a "feature" which does not appeal to me.

Regards,
David

[david_e]

Why do the percentages equal 155.93???

[frddgls]

Originally Posted by david_e

Why do the percentages equal 155.93???

Because you can choose more than one answer. I use the search function and I use shelves, the poll let me enter both answers.

[DNSB]

Originally Posted by david_e

Why do the percentages equal 155.93???

Possibly quite a few people did as I and voted in two or more check boxes. For me, I checked I'm using search and I don't need it.

Regards,
David

[DNSB]

Originally Posted by parkher

You don't have to type anything on touch screen to use folders. Just navigate.
Of course, hardware buttons (for page up/page down functionality) would be great for that purpose. But at Kobo they forgot that it is an e-ink device, not really suitable for scrolling/dragging. So at least buttons on the screen are needed.

And just how do I navigate without tapping/swiping the screen on a Kobo? Unless I go back to the original Kobo or Kobo wifi, no hardware buttons to move around the screen. Why bother with on-screen buttons when doing the page up/page down using swipe up/swipe down would be easy enough to implement. I have to say that scrolling down or up through 317 authors to find a specific author folder on an eink screen is not my idea of fun.

When I did my comparisons between search and directory browsing, I counted the number of taps/swipes on the Kobo screen needed to find a book using search. I counted the number of mouse clicks to find a book using the directory structure on my PC. The search function took fewer events.

I counted the taps required to access the search function with library selected and the number of mouse clicks required to open the directory in which my ebooks live as unavoidable overhead. I could put a shortcut on the desktop and shorten the mouse clicks by a couple though adding to the desktop clutter but didn't bother. I did count each mouse click required to page down the directory structure as equivalent to what I do on other mobile devices with an accessible directory structure to navigate through the directory structure.

Regards,
David

[theonna]

Originally Posted by BWinmill

Should Kobo implement this feature? It really depends upon who Kobo is targeting.

I guess you are correct.
But... If Kobo had made shelves more easily created- like being able to search for author and add all results to the shelf, search for title and add to another shelf, find all items not in any shelf and add them yet to another. Something that does not require you to go through all of the books each time you need to add one to the shelf. Something that does not require you to run third party software either, Calibre is great, but if you talking easy and user friendly, it seems to make sense not to have to rely on it, right?
Of course needs of people that read books with different not supported alphabets, seem to be so unimportant, that nobody so far even considered how having a file manager in lieu of being able to search for books would help them.
Now I hear again and again, how having a file manager would increase user error, but really almost everyone now has a computer, that has a file manager, you don't have to ever use it. But for those who needs it - it is a great tool.
It should be the same with Kobo- if you don't need it, you would never need to use it. Unfortunately with shelves, you find yourself needing them, yet managing them on your reader, if you have significant amount of books is impossible.