Anyone else think Snow Leopard... sucks?

[42gb]

Hey guys, just a quick question.

I have a Macbook C2D 2.0 GHz with 2gb RAM. GMA950

anyways I want to know if it's worth it to clean install SL
No other partitions. *is it worth it to install 10A432 as a primary?* or not yet?
I want to know if everything will work aka, iLife 09 iMovie HD, and Final cut Express..
I'm a YouTuber. and I use my mac to record and etc...

so do you guys think SL will make it better for me? or should i just stick with dual boot SL and Leopard?

has anyone have any compatibility issues with this build?

I've got the same laptop. 10A432 runs fine on mine. I haven't had a single compatibility issue.

The new Quicktime might appeal to you because it has a built-in YouTube export menu item. I have, though, experienced one bug. I was toggling quickly through the window size shortcuts and I caused some sort of freak out that froze my system. Here's a picture I caught before it rebooted itself.

It looks like porn, but I swear it's just the new episode of Mad Men.

 

[wankey]

Apple is slowly and inexplicably turning into Microsoft. 2 years, they push out an overglorified service pack. In 2 years they tweak the dock with 5-10 new graphics at most. In 2 years they rewrite the Finder in Cocoa?

Come on Apple. This isn't you. Either the Mac spirit has stagnated or simply the Apple butter's scaped on too much toast. iPhone is a huge market but they seriously need to bring the OS back into play.

Apple is all about innovation, lately they've just taken a Microsoft approach.

2 years to push out a service pack is rediculous if they ask me. They made Leopard in 1.5 years, even then they were being hampered by iPhone dev.

I hope 10.7 brings around A LOT of changes, hopefully they've saved a lot of their bigger features for 10.7 (holy number Steve Jobs, take note) and it will be a very next gen OS rather than the current Windows copy (which I feel Leopard has succumbed to, Tiger felt very original, Leopard just feels like they undid a lot of Apple originality for a wider audience appeal - a la Microsoft)

The pricing for 10.6 is pretty all that's making me buy it, if it was 129, I would've easily skipped it. Then again I could just pirate it.

 

[oc2pus]

Yeah, I've been hearing the same thing. A lot of people say they have their current Leopard tweaked to the point that it performs better than SL.

So, then the same people who were able to tweak Leopard will be the ones who cheer when the achieved the same with Snow Leopard, don't you think?

My MB-Pro early 2009 took about 20 mins. doing a clean install and so far everything runs as expected. The System Control Panel switches back to 32-bit whenever I use a 32-bit pref-pane, applications start up significantly faster (though I know that mail, address-book and so on are no real heavy-weights).

The only thing that struck me is the change of visual appearance with respect to QuickTime X. The new design reminded a bit of the Linux-distributions a few years ago when nothing really fitted together visually.

 

[sidewinder]

2 years, they push out an overglorified service pack.
.
.
.
2 years to push out a service pack is rediculous if they ask me.

A service pack???? They darn near rewrote the entire OS and included several significant new technologies. And you call it it a service pack?

Snow Leopard is the foundation for the future of Mac OS X. It wasn't supposed to be anything else.

S-

 

[2Shae]

A service pack???? They darn near rewrote the entire OS and included several significant new technologies. And you call it it a service pack?

Snow Leopard is the foundation for the future of Mac OS X. It wasn't supposed to be anything else.

S-

It feels like a something between a service pack and an upgrade, but more on the side of a service pack.
But even if Snow Leopard is just a foundation for future Mac OS X, why don't they improve on more things, like better use of Stacks, better Finder, an updated interface (it's looks dated), unification between iTunes & Quicktime and the rest of the OS.

Why for example does iTunes have different scrollbars???!!!!
And why is Quicktime X black???!!!!
It makes no sence at all.

I'm very very disappointed in Apple

I'm thinking of making Windows 7 my default OS, because at least Microsoft really tried and succeeded in making a better, modern and faster OS.

Since i'm completely neutral on the Apple/Microsoft thing, so I have no problem switching.

 

[cmaier]

Apple is slowly and inexplicably turning into Microsoft. 2 years, they push out an overglorified service pack. In 2 years they tweak the dock with 5-10 new graphics at most. In 2 years they rewrite the Finder in Cocoa?

...

I hope 10.7 brings around A LOT of changes,

You clearly misunderstand the difference between Apple and Microsoft, because you are requesting Apple to behave more like Microsoft.

Apple took 2 years to rewrite huge chunks of the OS to make it a more stable, less kludgy, more scalable platform for the future, including future devices like tablets, phones, etc.

Microsoft is the company that, with each release, adds features no one wants (clippy? ribbon bar?), changes things for no reason (random reorganization of file structure, arbitrary new widgets and graphics chrome, etc.). Everyone would be perfectly happy with Office XP, but every few years we get a new release with lots of "new features," just like you want. And the products are far the worse for it.

 

[soup4you2]

It feels like a something between a service pack and an upgrade, but more on the side of a service pack.
But even if Snow Leopard is just a foundation for future Mac OS X, why don't they improve on more things, like better use of Stacks, better Finder, an updated interface (it's looks dated), unification between iTunes & Quicktime and the rest of the OS.

Why for example does iTunes have different scrollbars???!!!!
And why is Quicktime X black???!!!!
It makes no sence at all.

I'm very very disappointed in Apple

I'm thinking of making Windows 7 my default OS, because at least Microsoft really tried and succeeded in making a better, modern and faster OS.

Since i'm completely neutral on the Apple/Microsoft thing, so I have no problem switching.

I will agree with you. there are numerous visual elements that just do not fit anymore or feel out of place. I've played with the latest seed and really for what I use the Mac for there is no significant gain to SL.

There are also areas that are purely neglected; the biggest in my opinion is Front Row, this used to be a great application until butchered it by making it sorta the same code base as the appletv. However it's been plagued with bugs and issues for a loooong time now and there's been absolutely no effort to fix them.

64bit will be sorta nice for the occasions I need to do some database work on my desktop, but other than that I don't see a need to give an application that much memory that 64bit allows.

It's nothing big but also If they went though all the troubles to completely re-write the finder, I really wish they would have added in Tab support.

Again these are just my opinions for what I use my Mac for. Other people do more complex things than I do, so SL may be more beneficial to them. but for me I don't see a reason in upgrading from Leopard.

 

[sidewinder]

It feels like a something between a service pack and an upgrade, but more on the side of a service pack.
But even if Snow Leopard is just a foundation for future Mac OS X, why don't they improve on more things, like better use of Stacks, better Finder, an updated interface (it's looks dated), unification between iTunes & Quicktime and the rest of the OS.

Why for example does iTunes have different scrollbars???!!!!
And why is Quicktime X black???!!!!
It makes no sence at all.

I'm very very disappointed in Apple

I'm thinking of making Windows 7 my default OS, because at least Microsoft really tried and succeeded in making a better, modern and faster OS.

Since i'm completely neutral on the Apple/Microsoft thing, so I have no problem switching.

The point of Snow Leopard was not to improve Stacks, change the function of the Finder, update the UI, or unify iTunes and QuickTime. Nor was it to improve any other application.

If that is what you expected, you set your expectation wrong based on what Apple has said all along and what you have been able to find and read here.

Please, by all means, make Windows 7 your primary OS. You are not scaring anyone with that threat.

S-

 

[amorya]

As a developer, I think Snow Leopard is awesome. I'm running it right now, and not only do the new features make development much nicer, it's also got some nice improvements and tweaks to the UI that make using it better too.

I think Snow Leopard is exactly what they should have done. They fixed all the things that were not as good as they could be, rather than concentrating on flashy new features. When I swap to my Leopard machine (G5, so can't upgrade ) I really notice the absence of some of the new stuff (particularly the improvements to the Dock, Exposé and Stacks).

Because loads of the Snow Leopard features are for developers, you'll soon get apps that require Snow Leopard. Then, as a consumer, you'll really see what $29 gets you: the ability to run a whole host of new and exciting apps that are faster and took less time to develop.

 

[mrbobbo]

Debug code is not release code

Just to correct you, debug code has more than symbols. It frequently has LOTS more executing code to record statuses, statistics and other internal information that the programmers think might help them. So you can expect it to be slower not just bigger. And there's always the chance that the extra code breaks something.

Debug code is the same code as release code, it just has a lot of symbols that the compiler leaves in the code to make it easier to debug, and thus it's bigger and consumes more memory.

 

[stainlessliquid]

Snow Leopard is the foundation for the future of Mac OS X. It wasn't supposed to be anything else.

Then the future looks exactly the same as the past. There arent any changes that anyone will notice, visual or otherwise. Theyre proposed "speed improvement" is not a speed improvement, its the same speed as its always been. Applications dont start up like we're running SSDs, it doesnt boot up in a fraction of the time, files that took minutes to copy dont take seconds in SL, its all very much like Leopard. There may be streamlined code but it doesnt help anyone except for apple developers when they want to find something to change.

Apple wasted their time with this release, if their attempt was to make things faster then they failed miserably because its still the same. Or maybe they didnt spend any time on this release, it is after all $30, if they spent millions developing this theres no way they would sell it for $30. You get what you pay for, 30 bucks worth of improvements.

That being said its perfectly possible for my 2 month old MBP to be a bottleneck for SL's blazing performance. Maybe people with Mac Pro's running raid SSDs will see a speed improvement, but most people wont notice a difference.

 

[cmaier]

Then the future looks exactly the same as the past. There arent any changes that anyone will notice, visual or otherwise. Theyre proposed "speed improvement" is not a speed improvement, its the same speed as its always been. Applications dont start up like we're running SSDs, it doesnt boot up in a fraction of the time, files that took minutes to copy dont take seconds in SL, its all very much like Leopard. There may be streamlined code but it doesnt help anyone except for apple developers when they want to find something to change.

Apple wasted their time with this release, if their attempt was to make things faster then they failed miserably because its still the same. Or maybe they didnt spend any time on this release, it is after all $30, if they spent millions developing this theres no way they would sell it for $30. You get what you pay for, 30 bucks worth of improvements.

First, wait until you get the actual release to comment on its speed.

Second, the streamlined code helps everyone, including third party developers.

Third, even if speed on existing systems is exactly the same, speed on future systems is unlikely to be. Apple made foundational improvements, eliminated bottlenecks, etc. that will let future mac systems take advantage of many cores, take better advantage of 64-bit cpus and large amounts of physical memory, etc.

If Apple hadn't done this, then in another 3-5 years OS 10.8 or 10.9 would be the same stinking pile of crap that is Vista.

As a developer, I dream of the opportunity to take a development cycle just to "clean things up." Aside from delivering slight improvements to existing users, it enables me to go forward from that point with far greater alacrity. It's much easier to add features and improve things if you are starting from a clean base.

 

[NT1440]

Then the future looks exactly the same as the past. There arent any changes that anyone will notice, visual or otherwise. Theyre proposed "speed improvement" is not a speed improvement, its the same speed as its always been. Applications dont start up like we're running SSDs, it doesnt boot up in a fraction of the time, files that took minutes to copy dont take seconds in SL, its all very much like Leopard. There may be streamlined code but it doesnt help anyone except for apple developers when they want to find something to change.

Apple wasted their time with this release, if their attempt was to make things faster then they failed miserably because its still the same. Or maybe they didnt spend any time on this release, it is after all $30, if they spent millions developing this theres no way they would sell it for $30. You get what you pay for, 30 bucks worth of improvements.

That being said its perfectly possible for my 2 month old MBP to be a bottleneck for SL's blazing performance. Maybe people with Mac Pro's running raid SSDs will see a speed improvement, but most people wont notice a difference.

Do you know anything about programming at all? Apple just did itself a HUGE favor by finally redoing its code and we will see the benefits in the months and years ahead.

 

[Riemann Zeta]

To everybody demanding that each new OS revision have 1259 new features, I ask: what new features could be added that would actually be of value? I mean, I suppose they could completely change the UI just for sh*ts and giggles, but why? And if they did that, would there not be just as many complaints from people that actually like the Mac UI?

I guess I also do not understand the bitching and moaning about it being significantly slower than 10.5. Hell, I did an upgrade (not a wipe and reinstall everything), installing each build in succession from 10A380 to 10A432--and 10A432 is still much faster than 10.5. I wonder if all the performance problems that individuals are reporting have to do with the crappy Intel GMA3100 driver?

 

[NT1440]

To everybody demanding that each new OS revision have 1259 new features, I ask: what new features could be added that would actually be of value? I mean, I suppose they could completely change the UI just for sh*ts and giggles, but why? And if they did that, would there not be just as many complaints from people that actually like the Mac UI?

The funny thing is that most of the great features apple gives (time machine is by far the simplest backup and search utility I've ever seen) no one sees coming. Like many have said, Apple gives you products you didn't even know you wanted, and can't live without after you've used them.

Although not necessary, I would welcome the "marble" interface, but hell just drilling down in stacks amongst other things is worth the $9.99 (up to date program) to me. I'd pay the full $29 if I had to.

 

[2Shae]

I will agree with you. there are numerous visual elements that just do not fit anymore or feel out of place. I've played with the latest seed and really for what I use the Mac for there is no significant gain to SL.

There are also areas that are purely neglected; the biggest in my opinion is Front Row, this used to be a great application until butchered it by making it sorta the same code base as the appletv. However it's been plagued with bugs and issues for a loooong time now and there's been absolutely no effort to fix them.

64bit will be sorta nice for the occasions I need to do some database work on my desktop, but other than that I don't see a need to give an application that much memory that 64bit allows.

It's nothing big but also If they went though all the troubles to completely re-write the finder, I really wish they would have added in Tab support.

Again these are just my opinions for what I use my Mac for. Other people do more complex things than I do, so SL may be more beneficial to them. but for me I don't see a reason in upgrading from Leopard.

You're completely right about Frontrow.
As a big Frontrow user, I'm also disappointed that they didn't work out the bugs...and Frontrow definitely has some annoying bugs.

Would have liked to see tab support in Finder too.
They might as have added MSN support for iChat as well.

You know, it was just little things like this that I was expecting.

A question to the defenders. Since Apple is "laying the foundation" for future releases", when exactly do you expect the new release to arrive? Do we have to wait another 2 years for a marginally improved OS.

In my opinion they could have just skipped Snow Leopard and just continue working on the next REAL release of OS X.

 

[cmaier]

In my opinion they could have just skipped Snow Leopard and just continue working on the next REAL release of OS X.

Next time you write an operating system I might give your opinion a little weight. Until then, I'll rely on my own experience having written millions of lines of code, and having designed a microprocessor or five.

If apple had just gone and chromed up the UI and added some new widgets and tabbed finders (yuck - the exact opposite approach they need - they should go back to the spatial finder), two years from now we'd have a stinking pile of poo.

 

[elgrecomac]

Snore Leopard -- here we go again....

I coined the name "Snore Leopard" in a thread I authored in the OSX forum a few months ago and got flamed repeatedly. I guess I just don't get the hype Apple is trying to muster about this DOT release...and, Yes, I've read the tech notes about it. Hell, Apple is essentially giving it away at $29! From an end-user perspective it is nothing to get excited about.

Yes, indeed, the Leopard is Snoring and he is dreaming of a DOT...release.

 

[whooleytoo]

They seem to be continuing the practice of alternating between technology and feature releases.

10.2 (Quartz Extreme, Bonjour, Address Book API) and 10.4 (Core Data, Core Video, Core Image, Spotlight metadata search, widgets, launchd) also introduced a lot of new frameworks/technology.

10.3 (Expose, Fast User Switching..) and 10.5 (Spaces, QuickLook, CoverFlow..) introduced new features/functionality based on the new frameworks.

I'm quite happy to pay 25 euros or so (Apple's cheapest ever OS upgrade?) for a revision which improves performance and footprint. Far better to have an OS that just lets you get on with it, than an all singing, all dancing OS ("Look, you can browse your apps with CoverFlow. Boom!" Why?!?)

 

[2Shae]

Exactly, it's just not a 10.X release. Maybe in Apple's eyes it is, but for the consumer (who should be the main priority) it just isn't.
It may sound weird, but if they would have called it a paid service pack, it would be a lot less disappointing.

I know Apple probably worked hard on rewritten parts of Leopards, but man...for Christ sake, at least add some functionality while you're at it.
I'll admit the new icon preview for audio & video is (slightly) useful.
The new Dock Expose is only moderately useful. I usually already know where all my windows are and rarely have more than 5 windows from 5 different apps open at the same time. So not really a feature I need.

Again, Windows 7 has really reinvented their taskbar...why can't Apple do that with the dock?

"Snow Leopard - Refining the Experience" My ass!!
"More of the Same" would have been a better title.

 

[yetdog]

Then the future looks exactly the same as the past. There arent any changes that anyone will notice, visual or otherwise. Theyre proposed "speed improvement" is not a speed improvement, its the same speed as its always been. Applications dont start up like we're running SSDs, it doesnt boot up in a fraction of the time, files that took minutes to copy dont take seconds in SL, its all very much like Leopard. There may be streamlined code but it doesnt help anyone except for apple developers when they want to find something to change.

Apple wasted their time with this release, if their attempt was to make things faster then they failed miserably because its still the same. Or maybe they didnt spend any time on this release, it is after all $30, if they spent millions developing this theres no way they would sell it for $30. You get what you pay for, 30 bucks worth of improvements.

That being said its perfectly possible for my 2 month old MBP to be a bottleneck for SL's blazing performance. Maybe people with Mac Pro's running raid SSDs will see a speed improvement, but most people wont notice a difference.

FWIW, I installed 10A432 on my Late 2008 MBP - 2.4Ghz, 4GB RAM - and not only did I recover 20+ GB of space, but it is *lightning* fast. Leopard was perfectly quick IMO, but the responsiveness of this system is unreal. Super fast.

 

[wankey]

You clearly misunderstand the difference between Apple and Microsoft, because you are requesting Apple to behave more like Microsoft.

Apple took 2 years to rewrite huge chunks of the OS to make it a more stable, less kludgy, more scalable platform for the future, including future devices like tablets, phones, etc.

Microsoft is the company that, with each release, adds features no one wants (clippy? ribbon bar?), changes things for no reason (random reorganization of file structure, arbitrary new widgets and graphics chrome, etc.). Everyone would be perfectly happy with Office XP, but every few years we get a new release with lots of "new features," just like you want. And the products are far the worse for it.

Right! Apple doesn't add some pointless features as well with every OS release! 3D dock? Obviously a huge improvement... not! Stacks? Another HUGE improvement... not! Coverflow? Another pointless marketing addition. I wonder who clearly misunderstands the difference?

Firstly I never requested Apple to behave like Microsoft. Secondly your points don't give you much advantage in this situation since it can apply to both sides.

Your points about Microsoft are invalid, and really don't help your argument. Apple has had its fair share of adding a load of features to new OS releases, then changing things for no reason. Everyone was perfectly happy with Tiger until Leopard came out. Does that prove anything? No.

These two companies are run very similar except Apple has an amazingly impressing marketing department to fool guys like you that Apple does no wrong. They've somehow fooled many people here into thinking that Snow Leopard is a complete re-write of OS X. That is completely false. The software developers at Apple are no more competent than software developers at Microsoft. It's simply that OS X is a much newer, and compact OS compared to Windows which is a huge monster with legacy support backing to the 90's. OS X Leopard doesn't even support G3 and early G4 PPCs.

While I certainly don't think Snow leopard sucks, since the price tag is enough to make me want it, I feel it's a wholly over glorified update. What's really going on, I think, is that their software engineers have been focusing heavily on iPhone OS platform and the Mac OS resources have been limited. They're seizing the release of Windows 7 to make a quick marketing ploy, that Win 7 at least has some competition when it launches.

Since both OSes are marketed the same way as well, they're both "optimizations" of previous OSes, it lets Apple get some market appeal under all of the Windows 7 assault. But the truth of the matter is really just that OS 10.6 is way over hyped than it really is compared to Windows 7, which is actually a giant leap in Windows. Win 7 actually isn't just a optimization fix at all. It's got so many UI changes that it dwarfs Windows 95 in terms of usability.

I would go as far to say that Windows 7 is a revolution of Windows, whereas Snow Leopard is simply a evolution. As I stated in my previous post, Apple really needs to step up to the plate and release a profoundly revolutionary OS in 10.7 if they want to keep the OS wars ongoing. Snow Leopard has set the foundation for such a thing to happen. There is already really no big reason for Windows users to move over to Mac, as Windows 7 already allows the same eye candy, the same performance (if not better), the same kind of security, and the killer here is at nearly 1/3 of the price of the worst Macs. Once Steve Jobs steps down, it'll be a hard turn for Mac (though not that hard on Apple as a whole as they've segmented into multiple industries). It's hard to justify spending nearly triple for Macs nowadays with laptop prices becoming on par with netbook prices.

 

[cmaier]

Right! Apple doesn't add some pointless features as well with every OS release! 3D dock? Obviously a huge improvement... not! Stacks? Another HUGE improvement... not! Coverflow? Another pointless marketing addition. I wonder who clearly misunderstands the difference?

Firstly I never requested Apple to behave like Microsoft. Secondly your points don't give you much advantage in this situation since it can apply to both sides.

Your points about Microsoft are invalid, and really don't help your argument. Apple has had its fair share of adding a load of features to new OS releases, then changing things for no reason. Everyone was perfectly happy with Tiger until Leopard came out. Does that prove anything? No.

These two companies are run very similar except Apple has an amazingly impressing marketing department to fool guys like you that Apple does no wrong. They've somehow fooled many people here into thinking that Snow Leopard is a complete re-write of OS X. That is completely false. The software developers at Apple are no more competent than software developers at Microsoft. It's simply that OS X is a much newer, and compact OS compared to Windows which is a huge monster with legacy support backing to the 90's. OS X Leopard doesn't even support G3 and early G4 PPCs.

While I certainly don't think Snow leopard sucks, since the price tag is enough to make me want it, I feel it's a wholly over glorified update. What's really going on, I think, is that their software engineers have been focusing heavily on iPhone OS platform and the Mac OS resources have been limited. They're seizing the release of Windows 7 to make a quick marketing ploy, that Win 7 at least has some competition when it launches.

Since both OSes are marketed the same way as well, they're both "optimizations" of previous OSes, it lets Apple get some market appeal under all of the Windows 7 assault. But the truth of the matter is really just that OS 10.6 is way over hyped than it really is compared to Windows 7, which is actually a giant leap in Windows. Win 7 actually isn't just a optimization fix at all. It's got so many UI changes that it dwarfs Windows 95 in terms of usability.

I would go as far to say that Windows 7 is a revolution of Windows, whereas Snow Leopard is simply a evolution. As I stated in my previous post, Apple really needs to step up to the plate and release a profoundly revolutionary OS in 10.7 if they want to keep the OS wars ongoing. Snow Leopard has set the foundation for such a thing to happen. There is already really no big reason for Windows users to move over to Mac, as Windows 7 already allows the same eye candy, the same performance (if not better), the same kind of security, and the killer here is at nearly 1/3 of the price of the worst Macs. Once Steve Jobs steps down, it'll be a hard turn for Mac (though not that hard on Apple as a whole as they've segmented into multiple industries). It's hard to justify spending nearly triple for Macs nowadays with laptop prices becoming on par with netbook prices.

Your arguments are facially ridiculous. Comparing a 3-D dock to the ribbon? Really? You don't see the difference? And while I agree stacks suck, I love coverflow and couldn't live without it in my current job (which involves heavy review of pdf and word docs).

And this cracks me up: "It's got so many UI changes that it dwarfs Windows 95 in terms of usability." Gratuitous UI changes are exactly what eliminates usability.

And where's all this "overhype?" A WWDC announcement and apple's web site? give me a break.

And you make the typical juvenile argument by referring to "guys like me." You know nothing about me, so let me tell you. I've used every non-Xenix MS operating system ever, all the way back to the first DOS. I used MS multiplan and word on my TI-99/4A. I've used operating systems like VMS, SunOS (pre-Solaris), MTS, etc. I designed microprocessors for companies like AMD and SUN for 14 years before switching careers. No one is "fooling" me into thinking that MacOS blows away vista/windows 7. (and, btw, Apple programmers are MUCH better than MS programmers.)

 

[tvon]

Apple is slowly and inexplicably turning into Microsoft. 2 years, they push out an overglorified service pack. In 2 years they tweak the dock with 5-10 new graphics at most. In 2 years they rewrite the Finder in Cocoa?

What about this was "overglorified"? The fact that Apple said there would be no major user-visible changes? The fact that Apple said they were focusing on "under the hood" and architecture changes? What exactly were you expecting? It's a $30 upgrade that contains, wait for it, exactly what Apple said it would. What's the problem?

And how the hell does this equate to Apple "turning into" Microsoft who is selling Windows 7 for $120 minimum (maybe it can be found cheaper, I haven't looked very hard)?

 

[OldCorpse]

I'm fine with just changes under the hood, but I would have liked one thing that the mac has never had: a decent file manager. Finder is just disgraceful. They should have used this SL opportunity to re-think how file managing should be done. Re-think from scratch. You can't "fix" Finder. It is conceptually fatally flawed and so painful to use in everyday life that I experience panic attacks just thinking I have to invoke it. It is hard to get any work done with Finder. Moving files is an unparalleled horror. Even windoze does it better. Browsing files - horror. Try seeing where everything is at a glance - you can't. At least in a tree system you can.

Apple should have called their brightest minds, and said: re-think the whole concept. Find us a brand new way of managing files that will revolutionize the entire field. Make it as profound a change as any. Because in the end, that's what a file manager is: it is the central function of a OS - this is where we interact with our data. Astonish us, Apple. Don't disgust us, as with Finder. Finder = FAIL.