Breadcrumbs in Windows Vista Developer Story

[Maza]

I was not sure where to post this; therefore, it was decided to create a new topic.

It is understood among enthusiasts that breadcrumbs were introduced in Windows Vista and are a a pre-reset "Longhorn" feature; however, an early version of the Windows Vista Developer Story indicates that breadcrumbs could be customized by application developers (emphasis added).

Comparing URLs and Breadcrumbs in Search Functionality

Windows Vista™ provides Breadcrumbs as an alternative to http:// protocol addressing for browser navigation. A Breadcrumb refers to a trail of Web sites (or folders) that the user has followed to get to a specific place on the Internet (or local drive). For example, http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/details.aspx has the associated breadcrumb: Microsoft > Downloads >.

Each Breadcrumb item is a link to the associated page. Breadcrumbs can be given any color, shade, or font, including an underline. It is advised that Breadcrumbs be given a different design than standard URL formats.

Additionally, Microsoft listed various advantageous of breadcrumbs over traditional URL-based navigation schemes. In regards to searches, readers might recall that pre-reset "Longhorn" documentation stated "The breadcrumb bar in the storage page helps users keep track of where they are and what filters they have used," a detail to which the Windows Vista Developer Story alludes: "This also applies to the results of searches."

Advantages of Breadcrumbs over URLs
User testing has demonstrated that breadcrumbs have a number of advantages over raw text URLs, although both carry similar path content.

Users consider a URL more difficult to read. Part of the difficulty in interpreting URLs derives from their concatenated nature, use of unfamiliar symbols, and additional context/query information that is sometimes appended to URLs. For example, the following link navigates to the Microsoft Windows Defender site. Notice the query beginning with the question mark (?) symbol.

http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/deta ... laylang=en

Its corresponding breadcrumb is much easier to comprehend:

Microsoft > Downloads > Defender

Users sometimes want to know where they are in a hierarchical structure and navigate relative to their current location. Breadcrumbs make this type of navigation much easier than editing raw URL text strings. This also applies to the results of searches.

[LuLu]

or just look Next Step presentation from 1983 and see how it has it there
in alot better way lol

most things were just rip-offs

breadcrumbs from nextstep
virtual desktop from os/2 (tho one can argue here as shared source with nt)
desk compositor - duh... linux, java, osx
WinFutureStorage - beos
QuickSearch - osx
.net - java
...
...

[Maza]

or just look Next Step presentation from 1983 and see how it has it there
in alot better way lol

most things were just rip-offs

breadcrumbs from nextstep
virtual desktop from os/2 (tho one can argue here as shared source with nt)
desk compositor - duh... linux, java, osx
WinFutureStorage - beos
QuickSearch - osx
.net - java
...
...

Thank you for responding, LuLu.

This deserves a thorough analysis and commentary, but I do not have the time to write such at the moment. However, I would like to briefly comment on Quick Search and Windows Future Storage in particular.

Why do you regard the two as being rip-offs of features in BeOS and OS X? Microsoft's intentions for Windows Future Storage—which included the Quick Search functionality—were widely known before the introduction of Spotlight in OS X. Please explain in detail why you think Windows Future Storage is a rip-off of BeOS functionality.

[LuLu]

coz quick search didn't exist until winfs proved to be slow crap
and spotlight was implemented even before ms decided to ditch it (read the memo from jim allchin)

[Maza]

At this time I would like to address your comments about breadcrumbs being a rip-off of functionality from NeXTSTEP.

Breadcrumbs facilitate access to folders in a folder hierarchy; however, NeXTSTEP provides no feature—at least none of which I am aware—that allows users to use breadcrumbs to navigate across metadata properties (or property trees in pre-reset "Longhorn" and post-reset Windows Vista Beta).

For instance, in Windows Vista one can access an "Authors" Virtual Folder and select, from the breadcrumbs, a specific document author. Alternatively, one can use the column headers to filter based on properties, which automatically become virtual locations in the breadcrumb hierarchy. In the following example screenshot, I have opened an "Albums" Virtual Folder, navigated into an album stack and have narrowed results to include only tracks by a specific artist that are rated 5 stars (Albums -> C'Est L'Amour: Romantic French Classics -> Henry Mancini And His Orchestra -> 5 Stars):



The results of this query call to mind comments made by Hillel Cooperman during PDC 2003 (emphasis added):

All right, one more thing. You might say, "Well, I understand that these views are generated dynamically. I understand this is all based on this structured metadata that Bill was talking about, but I could kind of approximate this with folders today. I could make a bunch of folders for authors, and then in them have project folders." I'll tell you something you couldn't do. You couldn't do it, have that exist, and do the reverse; for example, be able to navigate first author, then project or first project then author.

The reverse arrangement of the previous query for music tracks is possible. Rather than navigating first into an artist stack, in the following screenshot I have instead narrowed results for 5-star tracks and then filtered results to a specific artist:



Please note that this is without regard for the underlying location of the track on the hard disk. I do not need to know where it is stored and, because of this flexibility, I can honestly say that I do not want to know where it is stored.

coz quick search didn't exist until winfs proved to be slow crap

That is demonstrably false. The instant search functionality of "WinFS" was touted as one of its benefits during PDC 2003:

So let's do a simple thing that you think would be simple today, but "WinFS" is going to provide built-in search facilities. So I have 1,100 items. I want to find all the items that have something to do with "Longhorn." So as I type I want you to watch the number right here, 1095, go down to 30, and see how fast that happens. By the time I'm done typing, we're down from 1,110 to 30 items right there in the system. (Applause.)

Instant Search as well as the ability to stack items were, of course, introduced with Windows Search in Windows Vista.

and spotlight was implemented even before ms decided to ditch it (read the memo from jim allchin)

Allchin's memo was written in 2004; the previously described "WinFS" functionality was in development since at least 2003.

Even if one were to write that Spotlight was in development at the same time or even before "WinFS," instant search functionality was available prior to the latter's development with the Indexing Service in Windows, a precursor to Windows Search.

[LuLu]

there is so much wrong in your debate that is just my waste of time to do time search
so heres quick narrow it down

1. breadcrumbs: youre now doing it to the bone, it existed in nexstep in '83, you don't really think after 30 years someone would copy it and improve it ? ... ... or you'd copy exact outdated thing from 30 years ago ?

2. quick search, relies on XML strictly, unlike winfs, so yes, osx had it 1st

3. i don't care if winfs was in dev since 90-ies, it NEVER was finished because it was CRAP and REPLACED

[Maza]

there is so much wrong in your debate that is just my waste of time to do time search
so heres quick narrow it down

I endeavored to articulate and defend by position in regards to some of the features that you mentioned. There is no such thing as a waste of time during a debate so long as the discussion is civil and productive.

1. breadcrumbs: youre now doing it to the bone, it existed in nexstep in '83, you don't really think after 30 years someone would copy it and improve it ? ... ... or you'd copy exact outdated thing from 30 years ago ?

You previously stated that the version in NeXTSTEP was superior:

or just look Next Step presentation from 1983 and see how it has it there
in alot better way lol

Now you apparently concede that the version introduced in Windows Vista is better.

2. quick search, relies on XML strictly, unlike winfs, so yes, osx had it 1st

Would you please clarify what you mean by this? Did OS X have it first because it relies on XML before Quick Search or "WinFS"? I should note that even "WinFS" relied on XML for details such as schemas.

3. i don't care if winfs was in dev since 90-ies, it NEVER was finished because it was CRAP and REPLACED

Even if its development had not completed it still offered the feature before Spotlight in OS X. Additionallly, you did not address that Indexing Service existed almost a decade before Spotlight and provided content indexing, instant search, etc.

[LuLu]

where did i state vista had it better ?

i wrote strictly, wfs didn't not to mention it was bonded to file system

indexing and quick search are not the same...

[Maza]

where did i state vista had it better ?

1. breadcrumbs: youre now doing it to the bone, it existed in nexstep in '83, you don't really think after 30 years someone would copy it and improve it ? ... ... or you'd copy exact outdated thing from 30 years ago ?

i wrote strictly, wfs didn't not to mention it was bonded to file system

Strictly as in?

Without schemas "WinFS" would be useless for what Microsoft intended.

Windows Search itself is rather...intimate with NTFS. The indexer is protected by NTFS permissions, for instance, and Windows Search responds to notifications via the USN Change Journal.

indexing and quick search are not the same...

The Indexing Service and Windows Search are not the same? Is that what you mean?