I’ve been trying to disentangle my online life from Google for a while. And as someone who wrote about Android professionally for years, it hasn’t been easy. I’ve ditched Chrome, but I still use a Samsung Galaxy phone and Google Pixel Watch, for example. But when I finally got off the big daddy, Google Search, and switched to DuckDuckGo, it had a surprising effect: Google got better. That’s a broad statement, so let me be more particular right away. Switching to DuckDuckGo made parts of Google better, specifically Google Discover and Google News. And since I cover news for hours every morning as part of my job, that’s kind of a big deal for me. No need for Incognito Mode I’ll give you a scenario. I’m having a dinner with a friend, and they tell me that Sabrina Carpenter’s music video in an NYC church was scandalous. This is something I had no idea about, because I don’t follow pop music. But just for the sake of keeping the conversation going, I’d search (or as I would have said at the time, I’d Google) for something like “Sabrina Carpenter NYC church scandal.” If I’m being careful, I’d switch my browser over to Incognito/private mode first…because if I don’t, I’ll be seeing nothing but news about Sabrina Carpenter for the next few days in Google Discover. If I’m being lazy, I just search in the URL bar and deal with my adjusted algorithm. Ditto for some things I just don’t want Google to know about me. Say I break my toe and I’m looking for a good podiatrist. (I have not broken my toe, but you get the idea.) If I search for “podiatrist near me” on Google, I’ll be seeing ads full of feet for a long time, because medical services are big business in the backwards capitalist wasteland of the United States. Again, I’ll dip into Incognito mode (even though I know Google’s still going to watch me, through fingerprinting if not through blatant history monitoring) for anything vaguely medical or private. Google Google’s recent demand to shove generative “AI” into every aspect of customers’ lives, whether they want it or not, has given me some very pointed reasons to look for alternatives. And it’s not as if I was super happy with Google before that — it’s a poster child for the enshittification of everything digital, and the declining quality of search results is probably the most visible part of that. The fact that Google seems to want to destroy my career surely doesn’t help. DuckDuckGo is the most obvious choice, so it’s the first one I switched to. I changed the default search in my Vivaldi browser, on my desktop, laptop, and phone. And I’d be lying if I said that it was seamless. DDG uses a different crawler and algorithm for search ranking, of course things will be different. And to my disgust, it’s still trying to use “AI.” But it wasn’t so different that I was lost — after all, we’re talking about a list of links, which is what Google looked like years ago, and what I was really looking for now. So I don’t “Google” (verb) anymore, I search on DuckDuckGo, which doesn’t flow quite as well. And after a little adjustment, I was surprised at how little it took to, well, adjust. DuckDuckGo is committed to the privacy bit, so it doesn’t even ask for you to log in — I don’t have an account and haven’t felt the need for one at all. (You do get some more advanced options if you log in, FYI.) DDG doesn’t track anything, according to its promotional materials, and so far I haven’t been able to find anything that contradicts that claim. Discovering a better news feed But all that wasn’t half as surprising as when Google Discover started getting better. Google Discover, the algorithmic feed of news and other topics that’s easily accessible on most Android phones, is a huge driver for traffic all over the web. That includes PCWorld and its sister sites. So even if I wanted to quit it, I’d still need to take a gander at Google Discover and Google News several times every workday. That’s why I have a separate app to make it work with my custom Android launcher, Nova. Google The biggest immediate improvement is that I can search for pop star gossip via DuckDuckGo without suddenly seeing my Discover feed turn into Us Weekly. For that matter, I can search for Us Weekly (because I didn’t know if it was capitalized ‘US Weekly’ or not!) without it affecting Discover or News, either. It’s freeing! And now, the primary determiner of my Discover feed is…what I tap on in Discover. Imagine that. So Discover has more and more tech news, and a bunch of sci-fi and gaming stuff, the things that I actually like to read about on my phone. It’s reverse enshittification. Amazing. And since I’ve uninstalled Chrome on my phone, I can click on it and read in the Android version of Vivaldi, which is a far superior experience. Another fun bonus: Google doesn’t know what targeted ads to show me in Discover anymore. So I’m getting some real random stuff, scraping the bottom of the barrel for things like robot puppies with blatantly fake AI video trailers, or discrete nipple covers. Google is getting very bad at advertising to me, specifically, and I’m enjoying it a lot. Google If you’re not aware, I’m a 37-year-old cis man. I’m not necessarily opposed to either robot puppies or covered nipples, but the idea that someone paid Google to try and sell me either is entertaining. I wouldn’t say that poorly-targeted advertising from Google is a plus of using DDG in the conventional sense, but hey, I’m enjoying it. Less Google is better Google If you’re wondering, I’ve asked a representative at DuckDuckGo if the company plans to introduce anything equivalent to the Google Discover or News algorithmic feed. They told me no. DuckDuckGo News only works if you search for something specific, and if you enter a blank query, it goes back to the main search page. DuckDuckGo is far from perfect, too — whenever I search for anything that’s even remotely related to a product I can buy, I get the same “There’s One Clear Winner Now” ad, and dammit, there’s no way there’s “one clear winner” for the best backpack for a million people making that search. DuckDuckGo’s entire primary search page, for any product-related info, is advertising. And not good advertising. DuckDuckGo But there is one clear winner for a basic, no-frills search, that doesn’t want to steal a bunch of data and keep me on the page for every possible second. And it isn’t Google. Google still knows a hell of a lot about me. I’m still using Gmail, Google Docs, Google Maps, YouTube, even searching with Google Images, because DuckDuckGo just isn’t quite there yet. And I’m still signed into my account at basically all times. Heck, Google still has a lot of my health data, because my Pixel Watch uses FitBit to track exercise and sleep, and that’s also Google. But between ditching Chrome and Search, the fact that other Google services get better when you don’t use them is both interesting and imminently satisfying. Maybe some high-profile antitrust court losses will make for a slightly better internet, for users if not for megacorps. It makes me wonder how some other changes might improve things — maybe I’ll try for a Google Maps alternative next. Read...

The Windows 11 Start menu is a functional menu, but not much more. Does that mean that Microsoft never had any better ideas? Of course not! In fact, they recently shared the Start menus that could have been. Four years ago, in 2021, my review of Windows 11 called it “unnecessary,” in part because of the unappealing Start menu that carried over from Windows 10X. Microsoft has since tweaked the Start menu, testing a “categories” view of Start and then bringing it to Windows alongside a new “phone companion” dashboard. A new blog post (via Windows Central) in the Microsoft Design “Beyond the Surface” series shows something else the company has been thinking about: bringing in notifications and functionality from other areas of Windows. For example, at least one concept notified the user about an upcoming meeting, along with a warning to turn off their out-of-office message. Microsoft said that it had four “guiding stars”: that the user’s entire apps library should be “right there;” that you should be able to “make it yours;” that “each pixel must earn its keep” in accelerating your day; and icon memory must be maintained. Each design concept was created using whiteboards, then tested via 300 Windows 11 fans, Microsoft said. “We watched eye-tracking heat maps swirl, counted scroll wheels, and listened for ‘Oh!’s of delight to know where we were hitting the mark,” the team wrote. Windows 11 Start: What could have been As someone who actually uses Phone Link regularly, the idea of a slide-out phone dashboard appeals to me. Even then, however, I’m using other apps within the Windows ecosystem far more. Microsoft’s concepts highlight these apps. At least one concept provides a pretty radical re-design of the current layout, like this one: Here, the “recommended” apps and documents are also entirely replaced, and Windows is emphasizing the creative and productive elements first. Note the meeting reminder as well. Others, such as the concept below, take a more conventional view. There’s a bit of a throwback to the lists of apps in older versions of Windows, such as XP and 7, with what looks like an expandable list of apps to the left, as well as shortcuts to the top. One Windows 11 Start concept (below) looks similar to the way things look now. The downside is that this Start menu appears to take up most of the visible screen and beyond. That’s probably not what Microsoft wanted. Incidentally, none of these Start concepts indicate anything about being able to resize or move the Start menu. This next Start concept provides a nice mix between a traditional Start menu and one that feels a bit more informative. It leans heavier on showing off apps, rather than documents, to the user. Again, a Start menu that attempts to communicate information feels more useful than the current layout, even if some of this could be replicated in the notifications that appear in the Action Center to the lower left of the Windows screen. This last concept (below) also doesn’t feel too different than what Microsoft already provides within Start. But again, note that it least highlights the upcoming meeting. Being able to know that there was a meeting due in two minutes—and being able to quickly click that meeting to join it—feels valuable. To me, anyway! I don’t mind the inclusion of Stranger Things. One of the things I’ve always wanted Microsoft to lean in on was more unique configurations. Remember how the Windows setup process asks whether you’ll be using the PC for gaming, creative work, or in a professional sense? More customized Start layouts would be a nice approach to that. Of course, none of these Start designs are being used. It’s possible that Microsoft considered these prototypes to be cluttered and confusing—some definitely are—but they also have a sense of energy about them, with an attempt to place more useful information in front of the user. That’s something Windows 11’s Start menu still lacks, robbing it of the personalization of Windows 10. For now, it’s up to third-party developers like Stardock Software and its Start11 software to step in. Read...

Tauranga property owners have had a “significant win” after the council agreed to update flood maps, a developer says. Read...

Landowners can override council maps with a `simple` stormwater assessment. Read...

If you’ve ever used your phone to navigate from one appointment to the next, then you’ve probably never used Windows Maps. That’s basically why Microsoft is getting rid of it. In an ongoing calendar of deprecated features within Windows, Microsoft has targeted Maps for deprecation by April. It will be removed from the Windows Store by July and will no longer be supported, the company said. In July, a new update will turn the Maps app off. “Any personal data or files you have saved, such as guided navigation or URLs to maps, won’t be removed, but they’ll no longer function in the Maps app past July 2025,” Microsoft said. The Maps app won’t come preinstalled on new PCs past the current Windows 11 24H2 release, either. Maps will still be supported within Windows, however. You’ll simply have to visit Bing’s own maps page to access them. Maps is a legacy app that was invaluable on Windows Phones, though that platform died years ago. Now, there’s no real reason to hold on to Maps, or to add those few kilobytes to the install size of Windows. Maps, whose data is credited to both TomTom and Microsoft itself, also previously agreed to change the “Gulf of Mexico” to the “Gulf of America.” So if that riles you up, you’ll be glad to see Maps go. Read...

Google has a monopoly, and that’s the official line of the US federal government. In fact, it has two of them, losing two separate antitrust cases that threaten to cripple the tech giant. The Department of Justice has proposed forcing Google to sell or otherwise divest itself of the Chrome browser as its first and preferred remedy. But who would buy it? Unsurprisingly, there are beaucoup business beaus lining up around the block for this browser bachelorette. We’ve already heard that ChatGPT maker OpenAI is very interested, as testified in court by an executive. And another notable name in the AI space, search engine Perplexity, told a judge much the same thing. Bloomberg reports that Yahoo, which almost feels like legacy media at this point, would also be interested if Chrome becomes available. That’s three potential new homes for the world’s most popular browser. But it’s important to note that federal judge Amit Mehta hasn’t yet made a determination on how Google will be punished for violating the Sherman Antitrust Act. Just because prosecutors suggest breaking off Chrome doesn’t mean that he’ll agree it’s an appropriate end. And whatever happens, Google will certainly exhaust its legal options with enough money to make Solomon blush. Google losing control of Chrome is not a foregone conclusion, even if it feels that way from recent reports. But let’s proceed under the assumption that Google does have to sell off Chrome, along with the open-source Chromium project that underpins it. Who’s actually capable of buying it? Well, that first depends on the price. The value of Chrome—a free download for all desktop and mobile platforms—is hard to pin down to a dollar amount. I’m no business guru, but if you’d asked me a year ago, I would have guessed somewhere between 50 and 100 billion dollars. But that’s the value of Chrome to Google, incorporated with its search, advertising, and mobile properties, to say nothing of the entire Chromebook market segment, ancillary products like Google Maps and YouTube, etc. Divorced from all that, Chrome still has tons of value as the most popular browser on the planet (and the Chromium guts of many others, including Edge), but it’s undeniably less. For the sake of simplicity, let’s cut my conservative estimate in half and call it $25 billion USD. IDG / Ashley Biancuzzo Who could afford that? OpenAI could probably manage it, though it would be taking on a lot of debt to do so. The leading “AI” product maker is valued at over $150 billion, but that’s based on various investment rounds. The company has yet to turn a profit and doesn’t expect to for years (though that’s not necessarily a mark of shame in the tech world—just look at Amazon). And it’s undeniable that gaining billions of browser users would give ChatGPT an even bigger audience… and a massive treasure trove of data to train on. Perplexity is the newest player in this equation, officially releasing its large language model-powered search less than three years ago and using OpenAI’s GPT system. The latest valuation of Perplexity puts it at under $10 billion USD… which wouldn’t be enough to buy Chrome without huge debt. It would be more like Perplexity shifting its entire business model to browser-first instead of search. Not impossible, but considering that Perplexity has also made some overtures towards buying TikTok, it strikes me as a startup desperate for a new angle or identity. And Yahoo. Poor, poor Yahoo. Some of you reading this might not be able to remember when Yahoo was the dominant search engine before Google came along—it’s been that long since Yahoo was truly relevant. These days, Yahoo is more of a media amalgamation after being tossed around between several parent companies, and was most recently bought for $5 billion. Its most notable remaining products are probably sports news and fantasy sports platforms. The company still owns tech site Engadget and what remains of the AOL brand, but it sold the finance-focused TechCrunch to private equity firm Regent last month. (Full disclosure: Regent also bought PCWorld parent company Foundry the day before. Hi, business daddy!) Anyway, I don’t doubt Yahoo would love to get its hands on Chrome, if only to claw its way back into relevancy for a massive amount of internet users. But I simply don’t think it has the money, not when OpenAI is splashing around investor cash like it’s puttin’ on the Ritz. Microsoft makes the most sense to me as a new home for Chrome, as it’s been trying to regain browser dominance ever since Internet Explorer lost it two decades ago. The company has been so insistent that people switch to Edge that it’s been willing to engage in some, ahem, questionable activities to get them off Chrome. If Chrome was shifted into the “official” Windows browser—to say nothing of its dominance on other platforms—Microsoft would be pleased as punch. But Microsoft is no stranger to browser controversy or run-ins with monopoly regulation. That might be enough of an issue to keep the company at a safe distance from the proceedings, especially if it’s clear that the Department of Justice under a Trump administration isn’t afraid to swing a big stick against monopolies. Read...

If you’re using an Android phone, you’ve probably noticed that Google’s Gemini AI assistant seems to be popping up everywhere, the same way it’s been popping into Google Search, Docs, YouTube, etc. And this is true even if you aren’t using a Google-branded phone. Turns out, that’s no accident because Google is paying Samsung loads of money to make sure Gemini is front and center on its phones. The information comes from a predictable source: testimony in the ongoing and potentially disastrous Google antitrust case. (No, not that one, the other one. Google has lost two separate antitrust cases brought by the US federal government in the last year.) Bloomberg reports that Google is paying Samsung “an enormous sum of money” to put Gemini on its phones and integrate it into the One UI Android skin, according to Google platform and device partnership VP Peter Fitzgerald. The executive testified that the terms of the deal mean Google pays Samsung for every device that’s preloaded with Gemini and heavily featuring it in the system. Samsung also gets a cut of the advertising revenue generated from Gemini searches and other actions. The contract was set in place for at least two years, though the precise parameters (and how much an “enormous sum” amounts to) aren’t known. It makes sense for Samsung. The company has been pushing its latest Galaxy devices as chock-full of AI capabilities (with a skeptical-at-best response from the technology press), and of course it’s pretty rare for a giant company to turn down dump trucks full of money. And this is a familiar move from Google, who’s known to pay Apple billions every year to keep its search on the iPhone and other devices. Less straightforward transactions—like insisting that phone makers load up their devices with Google services like Docs, Maps, and YouTube in order to keep access to the de facto standard Google Play Store app platform—have gotten the company in regulatory trouble before. Users aren’t exactly thrilled with Gemini. As it fills up Google Search with answers of questionable utility and replaces long-term Google integrations like Google Assistant for smart device management, plenty of people are looking for alternatives. Apropos of nothing, did I tell you I really like the Vivaldi browser? It remains to be seen what’ll happen as a result of the antitrust verdicts. The US Department of Justice wants to force Google to divest itself of the Chrome browser, and the same might happen to Google’s advertising business. Either (or both) would be a crushing blow to the tech giant, possibly knocking it out of its leading category. But it’s far from certain whether these results will come about, and Google will exhaust appeals and every other option to keep them from happening. Read...

I’m not saying Windows is a terrible operating system, but it’s definitely no longer the one I choose to use on a day-to-day basis. After 30+ years of using Windows in its various forms (starting with Windows 95), I have moved on — but not to macOS! In fact, I’ve switched from Windows to ChromeOS and I’m loving every minute of it. Now, I want to be fully transparent: I admit that I still own an all-in-one Windows PC (currently running Windows 10 because Microsoft doesn’t think it’s capable of Windows 11), and I’m also likely to buy a new Windows PC before support for Windows 10 officially ends. However, my Windows PC only exists as a backup for those increasingly rare times when my Chromebook isn’t right for the task. Most days, my Chromebook is more than sufficient. Here’s why I switched and why I now love Chromebooks more than Windows laptops. Related: The best Chromebooks for every budget Why I switched to a Chromebook Why did I switch from Windows to ChromeOS? There were several factors that influenced my decision. Some may resonate with you, while others may differ from your own experiences. Reason 1: A simpler, less frustrating operating system Dave Parrack / IDG After decades of using Windows in its various forms, I grew tired of how frustrating it has become to use. It feels bloated and slow more often than not, even with a decently specced machine and everything updated. I don’t want to wait minutes for an operating system to fully boot and be ready to use, I don’t want it to constantly grind away in the background doing God knows what, and I don’t want to be troubleshooting it all the time when things inevitably go wrong. I want an operating system that boots on demand in seconds and simply works without fuss or obstacles. I just want to get on with my day and do what I need to do. That’s what I found in ChromeOS. Reason 2: Less stress about malware and security issues Mohamed Hassan / Pixabay Windows has always been the favorite target of scammers and hackers due to its mainstream popularity and the many vulnerabilities that continue to pop up even as older ones are fixed. In other words, while Microsoft has admittedly improved in this area, malware is more likely to hit and infect a Windows machine than a Chromebook. (Windows is riskier to use than macOS and Linux, too.) ChromeOS is especially safe and secure thanks to a range of built-in security features, including Verified Boot (which checks for unexpected changes on startup), Sandboxing at all levels (which ensures any issues are kept isolated), and the inability to run random executables. All of this, combined with the fact that malware creators are less likely to target ChromeOS, means I can use my Chromebook without worrying as long as I’m mindful of best practices for digital security. Related: Can Chromebooks get viruses? It’s complicated, but don’t worry too much about it Reason 3: No system updates that take hours to complete Dave Parrack / IDG Another constant frustration of using Windows that made me look around for an alternative is the seemingly never-ending updates that Microsoft pushes onto users — updates that aren’t seamlessly applied in the background but disruptive to daily productivity. I’ve often heard my PC chugging away as it downloads a massive Windows update, which then prompts me to restart my computer in order to install it. That can sometimes take upwards of an hour. ChromeOS, on the other hand, is such a lightweight operating system that its regular updates are fast, silent, and without fuss. It takes the hassle out of maintaining an operating system. Reason 4: Productivity without spending a fortune Dave Parrack / IDG As a freelance writer and editor, I have the privilege to work anywhere — at home, at an office, at a coffee shop, or even while on vacation. But only if I have a machine that’s light, portable, and user-friendly enough. Sure, there are plenty of Windows laptops and MacBooks out there that fit the profile, but they generally come with higher price tags than Chromebooks. For me, a Chromebook strikes the right balance between usability, performance, and affordability. Related: Don’t go below these specs in a budget laptop Reason 5: I’m already embedded in Google’s ecosystem Dave Parrack / IDG The final reason why I made the switch away from Windows to ChromeOS is the fact that I’m already embedded in Google’s ecosystem. I own an Android phone and I use most of Google’s apps (including Gmail, Meet, Calendar, Maps, Photos, etc.), so it wasn’t a huge leap to ditch Windows and go (almost) all-in on ChromeOS. In fact, the switch has made things easier for me as I now have full access to all of my data across my phone, Chromebook, and other devices. Why I don’t regret making the switch I have no regrets about buying a Chromebook and I have no shame in preferring ChromeOS over Windows. Here are three big ways in which the switch has left me in a better place than before. I’m actually more productive Matthew Smith / IDG The most obvious benefit I’ve felt after switching is a boost to my productivity, and that in turn has improved my work-life balance. As a writer who works from home but also needs the option to work outside of the home at times, a Chromebook offers the perfect blend of power and portability. I can get my work done with little fuss and I can do it from anywhere, without the operating system bogging me down. ChromeOS boots instantly and is ready when I need it Dave Parrack / IDG Despite being a desk worker, I don’t actually have to be sat at a desk for 8 straight hours every day. I have flexibility in my schedule, and that’s why I need a machine that’s always ready to use on demand. Sure, I could leave my Windows laptop running all day and jump on/off as required, but I don’t like the idea of needless idling. Sleep and hibernation modes are also options, but Windows is too sluggish for me when it comes to waking up. ChromeOS offers a more practical and environmentally friendly alternative. Given how lightweight Google’s OS is, it’s no surprise that it boots instantly and can be used at a moment’s notice. Web and Android apps are enough for me Dave Parrack / IDG One of the bigger worries I had when leaving Windows was losing access to all the Windows programs I’d been using for years. However, those fears proved (mostly) unfounded as there are adequate Android apps and web apps to replace the ones I used on Windows. What you may not know is that Chromebooks aren’t just limited to websites and Chrome extensions. A few years ago, Google added the ability to natively run Android apps on Chromebooks, and most apps in the Google Play Store are compatible with ChromeOS. Some work better than others, of course, and there was a lot of trial and error as I sought apps that most closely matched my needs and preferences. But these days, web and Android apps are pretty darn good and you can easily get by except in very specific situations. Related: Why your next laptop should be a Chromebook What you might miss if you switch from Windows to Chromebook ChromeOS works perfectly for me 99 percent of the time, but if you decide to follow suit and switch from Windows to Google’s operating system, there are some things you may miss — and I’d be remiss if I didn’t at least mention them. Access to your full-featured desktop applications Microsoft While I was able to find suitable web and Android apps to replace most of the Windows programs I previously relied on, some niche programs simply don’t have viable web or Android alternatives. For example, if your job requires that you use a particular Windows-only app — maybe even an in-house app that’s specific to your company — then you may not have a choice. Another example is software that comes in web and Windows versions, with the Windows version being more full-featured or more performant. In that case, switching to the web version might be an obvious downgrade that seriously harms productivity or usability. Therefore, you really have to do your research before making the switch, whether you’re switching to ChromeOS or some other operating system like macOS or Linux. Windows-only apps are a valid deal-breaker. PC games without needing to rely on cloud gaming Dave Parrack / IDG Contrary to popular belief, you can game on a Chromebook — and the experience is far better than you’d probably expect it to be. The caveat is that you can’t just install Steam and play all the same PC games that you can enjoy on a Windows machine. Yes, you can install Steam on Chromebooks now, but not all games on Steam are compatible with ChromeOS. You can also install most Android games on ChromeOS, which opens up a whole world of casual gaming opportunities (along with mobile ports of popular games like Stardew Valley, Dead Cells, and Hollow Knight). Otherwise, you have to rely on cloud gaming services if you want to play mainstream AAA games on a Chromebook. Using platforms like Xbox Cloud Gaming, Nvidia’s GeForce Now, and Amazon Luna, you can stream gameplay to your Chromebook… but it’s notably not the same as playing games locally on a high-end machine. If these limited gaming options are a problem for you, then you should probably skip the Chromebook. (Or keep a separate gaming PC.) Related: Are Chromebooks good for gaming? System upgradeability and customizations Framework If you’re a fan of either customizing your system to your heart’s content or upgrading your hardware to stay ahead of the curve, then ChromeOS probably won’t be for you. It’s meant to be a lightweight operating system that works out of the box, not something for tinkering and customizing and messing around in. And while that suits me perfectly, it won’t suit everyone. The same goes for the hardware, as you’re pretty much stuck with what you buy. Thankfully, ChromeOS isn’t at all heavy on resources, so as long as you buy smart to begin with, the hardware should last. Further reading: How to turn an old laptop into a Chromebook Read...

About 10 years ago, a prominent tech executive confidently informed me that computer files would become obsolete. The exec was Bret Taylor, who at the time was building a Microsoft Word alternative called Quip. (He previously oversaw the birth of Google Maps and served as Facebook’s CTO, and later became the co-CEO of Salesforce.) Taylor argued that Quip and other online-first services like Google Docs, Netflix, and Spotify were making file management unnecessary, and that conventional file formats like .DOC or .MP3 would eventually seem as antiquated as the floppy disk. His prediction has, in many ways, proven accurate. File management is now a foreign concept to an entire generation of young tech users, and you have to be a special kind of nerdy to consume media without relying on streaming services. If someone emails you a Word document, you might be more annoyed than if they’d linked to a Google Doc. But I’ve always found the humble computer file to be more than just an occasional nuisance. I enjoy using apps that produce easily-accessible files on my devices, because those files are under my command and can’t be taken away. Not the case with many of the online services we rely on. And this philosophy is gaining fresh life in some tech circles as people reckon with the trade-offs of a file-free future. This column first appeared in Advisorator, Jared’s weekly tech advice newsletter. Sign up to get tech advice like this every Tuesday. Why files still matter Streaming services can remove content and impose new access restrictions on a whim. Facebook and Google have locked people out of their accounts by mistake, rendering photos and communications inaccessible. Useful online resources could one day vanish from the web without warning. It’s all beyond your control. Preserving your own files can be a countermeasure against these kinds of scenarios. But beyond just data preservation, files provide a kind of freedom to choose the best tool for a given job. These days, I do most of my writing in Obsidian, which stores documents on my computer in Markdown format. If Obsidian goes away, or if I ever just want to try a different app, I can open those files in another Markdown editor without having to convert, upload, or migrate. Same goes with photos. I automatically back up my phone’s camera roll to Google Photos, but I also keep copies in OneDrive and on my computer. That means I can try out other solutions (like the offline-first Mylio) without going through Google’s time-consuming export process. Perhaps best of all, a file collection says something about you. It’s an all-encompassing representation of your digital life that—unlike most things in tech—becomes more valuable with time. Dig deep into my computer, for instance, and you’ll find a folder called “OldComputer.” This is one of my most cherished digital time capsules, a treasure trove of forgotten photos, college music projects, early web creations, and embarrassing AOL Instant Messenger chat logs that I apparently thought were worth keeping. Rifling through these old folders evokes feelings that Google Docs and Spotify can never guarantee. Here’s how you can get started Jared Newman / Foundry I’m not saying you need to drop all your online-first services in favor of strict file zealotry, or that you shouldn’t use cloud-based services for backup or syncing purposes. I still use all of those things because they’re useful and convenient. But if you value more control over your digital footprint, consider cultivating a file collection as part of that: Cobalt.tools is a free web-based utility that converts content from YouTube, Instagram, and other online sources into downloadable video and audio files. PlayOn, which I’ve written plenty about on the cord-cutting beat, can save videos from streaming services such as Netflix and Hulu. Keep an offline archive of articles you find useful. The Single File browser extension can save web pages as self-contained HTML files that are readable offline, and Obsidian has a free web clipper that works in tandem with its desktop app. If you’re a big note-taker, consider apps that store your notes in open formats that other apps can access. Obsidian is one, but there are others, like Joplin and Logseq. It’s not for everyone, but building a music file collection has been one of the more rewarding pastimes I’ve undertaken in the last 10 years. I buy a lot of albums on Bandcamp—which makes artists more money than streaming services—along with the occasional CD, which I immediately digitize. Meanwhile, I’m glad that the idea of owning your files is gathering momentum. Obsidian CEO Steph Ango calls this philosophy “file over app” while Matt Birchler calls it “downloading the things you love“. However you label it, I think the idea is worth cherishing even if big tech execs would prefer that you didn’t. This column first appeared in Advisorator, Jared’s weekly tech advice newsletter. Sign up to get tech advice like this every Tuesday. Read...

About 10 years ago, a prominent tech executive confidently informed me that computer files would become obsolete. The exec was Bret Taylor, who at the time was building a Microsoft Word alternative called Quip. (He previously oversaw the birth of Google Maps and served as Facebook’s CTO, and later became the co-CEO of Salesforce.) Taylor argued that Quip and other online-first services like Google Docs, Netflix, and Spotify were making file management unnecessary, and that conventional file formats like .DOC or .MP3 would eventually seem as antiquated as the floppy disk. His prediction has, in many ways, proven accurate. File management is now a foreign concept to an entire generation of young tech users, and you have to be a special kind of nerdy to consume media without relying on streaming services. If someone emails you a Word document, you might be more annoyed than if they’d linked to a Google Doc. But I’ve always found the humble computer file to be more than just an occasional nuisance. I enjoy using apps that produce easily-accessible files on my devices, because those files are under my command and can’t be taken away. Not the case with many of the online services we rely on. And this philosophy is gaining fresh life in some tech circles as people reckon with the trade-offs of a file-free future. This column first appeared in Advisorator, Jared’s weekly tech advice newsletter. Sign up to get tech advice like this every Tuesday. Why files still matter Streaming services can remove content and impose new access restrictions on a whim. Facebook and Google have locked people out of their accounts by mistake, rendering photos and communications inaccessible. Useful online resources could one day vanish from the web without warning. It’s all beyond your control. Preserving your own files can be a countermeasure against these kinds of scenarios. But beyond just data preservation, files provide a kind of freedom to choose the best tool for a given job. These days, I do most of my writing in Obsidian, which stores documents on my computer in Markdown format. If Obsidian goes away, or if I ever just want to try a different app, I can open those files in another Markdown editor without having to convert, upload, or migrate. Same goes with photos. I automatically back up my phone’s camera roll to Google Photos, but I also keep copies in OneDrive and on my computer. That means I can try out other solutions (like the offline-first Mylio) without going through Google’s time-consuming export process. Perhaps best of all, a file collection says something about you. It’s an all-encompassing representation of your digital life that—unlike most things in tech—becomes more valuable with time. Dig deep into my computer, for instance, and you’ll find a folder called “OldComputer.” This is one of my most cherished digital time capsules, a treasure trove of forgotten photos, college music projects, early web creations, and embarrassing AOL Instant Messenger chat logs that I apparently thought were worth keeping. Rifling through these old folders evokes feelings that Google Docs and Spotify can never guarantee. Here’s how you can get started Jared Newman / Foundry I’m not saying you need to drop all your online-first services in favor of strict file zealotry, or that you shouldn’t use cloud-based services for backup or syncing purposes. I still use all of those things because they’re useful and convenient. But if you value more control over your digital footprint, consider cultivating a file collection as part of that: Cobalt.tools is a free web-based utility that converts content from YouTube, Instagram, and other online sources into downloadable video and audio files. PlayOn, which I’ve written plenty about on the cord-cutting beat, can save videos from streaming services such as Netflix and Hulu. Keep an offline archive of articles you find useful. The Single File browser extension can save web pages as self-contained HTML files that are readable offline, and Obsidian has a free web clipper that works in tandem with its desktop app. If you’re a big note-taker, consider apps that store your notes in open formats that other apps can access. Obsidian is one, but there are others, like Joplin and Logseq. It’s not for everyone, but building a music file collection has been one of the more rewarding pastimes I’ve undertaken in the last 10 years. I buy a lot of albums on Bandcamp—which makes artists more money than streaming services—along with the occasional CD, which I immediately digitize. Meanwhile, I’m glad that the idea of owning your files is gathering momentum. Obsidian CEO Steph Ango calls this philosophy “file over app” while Matt Birchler calls it “downloading the things you love“. However you label it, I think the idea is worth cherishing even if big tech execs would prefer that you didn’t. This column first appeared in Advisorator, Jared’s weekly tech advice newsletter. Sign up to get tech advice like this every Tuesday. Read...