Dedicated iCloud Drive App Included Within Settings of iOS 9

[mariusignorello]

And yes, it can be hidden.

 

[AlecZ]

I'd be excited about this a year or two ago... But come to think of it, I can't remember the last thing I made that wasn't just stored in a git repo somewhere. XD

 

[ron7624]

This is nice. Very nice. I had hoped for this for quite a while.

 

[ApfelKuchen]

Newsflash - tags/labels are in essence folders with a different UI presentation to the end user. Giving a document or file more than one tag/label is exactly the same as putting things in a subfolder heirarchy in Finder. It isn't more or less efficient per say.

Do you need to find that PDF monthly report from June 2012? Do you open Finder and navigate to ~/Monthly Reports/2012 or do you open Preview and click open and then search for the tags Monthly reports and 2012? Same difference?

Also, tags are supported in iOS?? Seems to me they use folders there...

There are fundamental differences between tags and folders - Sure, you could use a tag in lieu of a folder, but the key point of tagging, to me, is cross-referencing - a file may naturally "belong" in a particular folder/sub-folder in your normal hierarchy, but you may want to find it using several other criteria, as well.

You may, for example, want to keep all your photos in folders/sub-folders organized by date. Tags can then used for locating those same photos by location, subject matter, etc. (It's easier to use Photos/iPhoto/Aperture for this, imo, but for those who dislike that approach...)

Now, the same thing could be accomplished by creating folders/sub-folders for "location," "subject matter," etc., and populating them with aliases, or using a file-naming convention that includes all the searchable terms you need, but adding tags is a good bit easier.

But all this regards OS X - you're right, tags are not supported in iCloud Drive. Tags added in OS X do not appear in the file's Info at iCloud.com > iCloud Drive, and based on precedent, I don't expect Info to be accessible or editable from iCloud Drive on iOS, either. (I don't have the 8.4 beta, so someone else would have to confirm this.) I think some sort of keywording/tagging is at least conceivable, down the road. Keyword searches can be a powerful tool when file libraries get large, and are sufficiently end-user friendly to fit into the iOS environment. But at the size of today's iCloud Drive libraries, it wouldn't seem to be all that necessary.

 

[MyopicPaideia]

There are fundamental differences between tags and folders - Sure, you could use a tag in lieu of a folder, but the key point of tagging, to me, is cross-referencing - a file may naturally "belong" in a particular folder/sub-folder in your normal hierarchy, but you may want to find it using several other criteria, as well.

You may, for example, want to keep all your photos in folders/sub-folders organized by date. Tags can then used for locating those same photos by location, subject matter, etc. (It's easier to use Photos/iPhoto/Aperture for this, imo, but for those who dislike that approach...)

Now, the same thing could be accomplished by creating folders/sub-folders for "location," "subject matter," etc., and populating them with aliases, or using a file-naming convention that includes all the searchable terms you need, but adding tags is a good bit easier.

But all this regards OS X - you're right, tags are not supported in iCloud Drive. Tags added in OS X do not appear in the file's Info at iCloud.com > iCloud Drive, and based on precedent, I don't expect Info to be accessible or editable from iCloud Drive on iOS, either. (I don't have the 8.4 beta, so someone else would have to confirm this.) I think some sort of keywording/tagging is at least conceivable, down the road. Keyword searches can be a powerful tool when file libraries get large, and are sufficiently end-user friendly to fit into the iOS environment. But at the size of today's iCloud Drive libraries, it wouldn't seem to be all that necessary.

Good point, and agree with its usefulness as a cross referencing tool, but that's just the thing. Tagging is just an easy way of aliasing file locations, letting OS X do the work. The drawback for me is that if your start relying on it as ypur sole/primary method of organization, what happens when you forget the exact name of the tag of something? Like you have originally created July Fourth instead of July 4th, or Trip to Yosemite instead of Trip to El Capitan? Gokart night instead of Go-cart night, etc.?

 

[ricosuave]

Good point, and agree with its usefulness as a cross referencing tool, but that's just the thing. Tagging is just an easy way of aliasing file locations, letting OS X do the work. The drawback for me is that if your start relying on it as ypur sole/primary method of organization, what happens when you forget the exact name of the tag of something? Like you have originally created July Fourth instead of July 4th, or Trip to Yosemite instead of Trip to El Capitan? Gokart night instead of Go-cart night, etc.?

There's a list of all the tags you've used.

 

[ApfelKuchen]

Good point, and agree with its usefulness as a cross referencing tool, but that's just the thing. Tagging is just an easy way of aliasing file locations, letting OS X do the work. The drawback for me is that if your start relying on it as ypur sole/primary method of organization, what happens when you forget the exact name of the tag of something? Like you have originally created July Fourth instead of July 4th, or Trip to Yosemite instead of Trip to El Capitan? Gokart night instead of Go-cart night, etc.?

What's the difference between forgetting the name of a tag and forgetting the name/location of a folder? Whether folder or tag, it's possible to create a new one despite the fact there's an appropriate, pre-existing one. Any system is only as good as our ability to adhere to the system.

I agree, tagging is "just an easy way of aliasing file locations." What's wrong with doing things the easy way? Unless you do all your file system work in Terminal with Unix commands, you're already taking advantage of "the easy way," tags is just another in a long line. I wouldn't suggest, however, that tags become a sole/primary method of organization. Cross-referencing is never the primary method of organization; it's used when the same item fits into more than one category. And tags are a "flat" system - no nested tags of yet.

I grew up across the street from the public library, using the old index card catalog. The Dewey Decimal System made sure the physical stacks were organized, and each book had its proper place. Each book then had several index cards (at a minimum) in the catalog - subject, author, title... and sometimes more than one of each. If I knew exactly what I was looking for, I'd go directly to the stacks. If I needed to search by other than the primary criteria, I'd head to the card catalog. So in my mind, it's simple: Location in the folder structure = location in the stacks; tags = card catalog.

Though I have to admit, the older I get, the fewer nested folders and tags I create. Search (including the pre-defined searches of Smart folders/mailboxes/albums/playlists) does most of my heavy lifting. "What" is far more important to me than "where."

 

[MyopicPaideia]

What's the difference between forgetting the name of a tag and forgetting the name/location of a folder? Whether folder or tag, it's possible to create a new one despite the fact there's an appropriate, pre-existing one. Any system is only as good as our ability to adhere to the system.

I agree, tagging is "just an easy way of aliasing file locations." What's wrong with doing things the easy way? Unless you do all your file system work in Terminal with Unix commands, you're already taking advantage of "the easy way," tags is just another in a long line. I wouldn't suggest, however, that tags become a sole/primary method of organization. Cross-referencing is never the primary method of organization; it's used when the same item fits into more than one category. And tags are a "flat" system - no nested tags of yet.

I grew up across the street from the public library, using the old index card catalog. The Dewey Decimal System made sure the physical stacks were organized, and each book had its proper place. Each book then had several index cards (at a minimum) in the catalog - subject, author, title... and sometimes more than one of each. If I knew exactly what I was looking for, I'd go directly to the stacks. If I needed to search by other than the primary criteria, I'd head to the card catalog. So in my mind, it's simple: Location in the folder structure = location in the stacks; tags = card catalog.

Though I have to admit, the older I get, the fewer nested folders and tags I create. Search (including the pre-defined searches of Smart folders/mailboxes/albums/playlists) does most of my heavy lifting. "What" is far more important to me than "where."

Yeah, this is getting away from the original assertion, which was that folders are dumb and tags are the future - all I was saying is that tags are no better or worse than traditional folders.