So I tried. My little experiment in trying to tame my attention deficit by limiting the number of tabs I would allow open at one time — FAIL. I suppose it was doomed to failure from the outset, but I learned a few things along the way about attention and how we browse:
Hyperlinking is the life-blood of the Internet. Emphasis on the “hyper.”
95% of the content you encounter on the web is about 25% as interesting as you hoped it might be. Which is why there are so many things crammed around the content itself — things like banner ads and links to other content some algorithm written by some programmer came up with. It shouldn’t be a crime to be interested enough to open up a link that intrigues you. Either we have to develop a better instinct (either from experience or some magical ESP) about what these links will lead to or we have to rely on filters to determine what links have a higher probability of being very, very interesting and valuable so as to be worth opening a new tab.
Web apps have a significant browser footprint. By default I tend to leave open tabs for webmail (Gmail), social networking (Facebook), and news (Nytimes). That’s at least 3 out of 7 already (if we’re trying to keep it below 7). I’ve heard productivity strategies that tell you to check these sites only twice a day or something crazy like that. Yeah, right.
Tabs = cognitive real estate. Throughout the day, you get links sent to you via email, or you stumble upon them or you see them on Facebook, and occasionally, you pop one open. And another. And another. And you forget to close them. Or some of them, you decide to leave open, because you want to re-tweet it, save it in delicious, or finish reading it later but you don’t want to go hunting for it again (where did I see that link?). Or sometimes you want them there as research for a blog post, and you want to refer back to it. You start your blog post, but you haven’t quite figured out what you want to say…
4 Comments to Reflections of a Tab-a-holic
by Joe
On April 30, 2009 at 8:29 am
I’ve been thinking about the same issues in this post and some of the other recent posts. A few comments:
1) Your mention of the word “filter” reminds me of the Clay Sharky interview where he correctly points out that there has been more information than any single human being could possibly know since the creation of the library of Alexandria. But over the ages, filtering mechanisms have developed which allow people to get relevant information, without getting overloaded by details. Examples of useful information filters are:
* card catalogs
* news publishers
* social networks
Shirky argues that the best way to view the difficulties arising from recent rapid technological change is not “information overload,” but rather “filter failure.” What we need is not less information, but better filters.
2) Over the past 6 months, I’ve experimented with many ways to improve my focus and productivity while using a browser. I was surprised to see that tinkering with tabs had a tremendous positive impact. I have two different experiments running on two different computers (both help):
* remove color and icons from tabs (using about:config)
* use the firefox extension Tree Style Tab
With Tree Style Tab, you can set up the tabs vertically, then group them hierarchically. I currently have 3 groups set up: Communication, Investing, and FilterJoe (the name of my blog). The only tabs visible are the ones I’m focusing on, and the top node of the other two groups.
3) The best focusing trick I’m aware of is F11, which invokes full screen mode on Firefox, IE8, Opera, and soon Chrome (version 2.0). Gets rid of all the browser chrome, including tabs.
Sorry so long, this post of your hits at the central point of my blog, FilterJoe, so I felt moved to share.
by Irwin
On May 1, 2009 at 12:57 pm
Joe,
1. Yes, you caught my Shirky reference (I love that quote). The only problem is, filters are hard to trust. I mean, I trust Gmail’s spam filter (more than Mail.app’s) though I do go into my spam folder once in awhile to see if its been off (rare).
The other thing about your first two examples, card catalogs and news publishers, is that they are ontological, which, as Shirky himself points out, are overrated.
And back to my first point, I will trust a filter I’ve made myself, ie, my social network or better yet, a select group of people or organizations I trust to filter certain things for me. Trust networks.
2. Removing color and icons from tabs? I rely heavily on those to re-find things. I feel like really the only way to deal with browser productivity is good ol’ fashioned self discipline, of which I have little.
3. I didn’t know about F11 (I’m on a Mac). But thanks for the comment! I checked your blog out. Some interesting stuff! Thanks for posting!
by Joe
On May 4, 2009 at 7:42 am
Irwin,
1. IMHO, Filters today are woefully inadequate for handling information in its present (and ever changing form). If a Filter is hard to trust, then it either needs work or needs to be replaced by a different concept. With news in particular – reading the NY Times or Wall Street Journal used to be a very simple and somewhat effective filter (for the respective, appropriate demographic). Now – it is a constant chore to figure out how to get the news. RSS readers like Google Reader have the inherent problem of requiring discipline on users’ parts to keep from overloading themselves.
2. If something requires “good ol’ fashioned self-discipline” in order to be able to use it, then in my opinion it’s a flawed tool. I don’t need discipline to keep from getting distracted when I’m reading a newspaper (or hammering a nail, or jotting a note . . .). Yet I need discipline when reading an article on the web, on so many levels. That’s why efforts like redub’s (and readability, readable, instapaper, etc.) are so much needed and appreciated. That’s why it’s easier to read on a dinky iPhone screen than it is to read on a large, full-powered desktop or notebook.
I know the removing-color-from-tabs idea seems strange (it did to me, actually). I never would have expected it to have the impact that it did. But it was dramatic. I’m focusing way better without the color than I did with the color. There’s something about color that catches your eye and makes you turn your attention to it – and sometimes click on it. It’s the difference between checking Gmail 3x or 4x per day as opposed to 20x or 25x per day.
3. On F11, I recently learned that there are two plug-ins for Safari that include F11 functionality: Saft and Glims.
http://haoli.dnsalias.com/Saft/index.html
http://www.machangout.com/
I have not tested either.
Trackbacks