I think it’s insane that there’s no way to group your bases within a workspace. It’s just a big ol’ base dump that grows more unwieldy by the day. All I want is to organize these by folders. Has someone figured this out yet??
I’m sure Airtable could have implemented this if they wanted to. However, what is their incentive? Their pricing structure is per workspace, with unlimited bases per workspace. If people could organize their bases in folders, there would probably be a lot more bases per workspace (increasing costs), and possibly fewer workspace (decreasing revenue).
Indeed, there are economic [financial] disincentives (for Airtable) to improve this aspect of the UX, but the UX is their hallmark differentiator. As the economists would say - the product is a bundle of “utility” values, not all of which are bound by dollars. We “hire” products to perform jobs for us; if they perform well, we don’t fire them. :winking_face:
Airtable is likely surprised at the number of bases people make and like field bloat, this surprise is partly driven by other shortcomings.
Yes, customers would be happier. However, Airtable is probably more focused on attracting new customers and avoiding having customers leave, versus making existing customers a little happier. Folders for workspaces is unlikely to be on the radar of potential customers and is probably never a deciding factor for deciding to try Airtable. Similarly, folders for workspaces is unlikely to be the reason why customers leave, given all the other reasons why customers leave.
True, but at scale (which seems to be the key target for Airtable) lack of organizational and findability features will impact the ability to sustain larger customers which is where they need to be if they want to sustain their $8+B valuation.
Enterprise customers can have unlimited workspaces. So enterprise customers can organize bases into different workspaces. Multiple folders = multiple workspaces. Now, this won’t help with nested folders/workspaces, but nested folders adds yet another layer of mental complexity, and Airtable seems to put lots of thought and testing into adding features that add complexity.
Good point - and an approach that often results in failed taxonomies of large proportions. Which folder do you put a base with data about EV energy consumption?
Tesla
BEVs
Cars
Folders are not likely to assist with findability, but a really powerful search model like this might. Most modern email users stopped classifying messages into folders because search is far better at finding stuff. The taxonomies of even modern Mac and Windows OS’s are fundamentally failed taxonomies.
Is this highest highEnd “Search My Bases” solution not yet available for annuel rent by an individual Airtable Pro account owner ?
I guess not, considering the difference in scale between both of them and the amount of customisation work you had announced necessary but as time has passed since then, I take my chance since “Search My Bases” remains, as you can imagine, the dream of disposing a private helicopter to cross the daily traffic jams here !
I wish it were a product realization, but there are only four such implementations - one at a law firm, one aviation company, and two other boring enterprises. Imagine Google on top of 250 bases and a few thousand tables and all of the security issues associated with that crap-ton of data. :winking_face:
I’m going to start a boring company because Brussel’s transit authority’s network is expanding and will continue to expand!
It’s time to do a double shot: an interesting business since I like Brussel’s ground and underground and maybe a chance to get access to an airborne configuration.
Because I can’t see myself neither taking off a plane nor dealing with law’s universe.
Renting Google on top of my Bases , Tables and on top of my Local Storage Files System too is still my dream :winking_face:
Have nice present and future projects and see you here,
