Customize Finder

Discussion in 'macOS' started by kem103, Aug 9, 2009.

  1. kem103 macrumors newbie

    Jun 14, 2009
    How do you set up Finder so that the file list shows the location. Right now all it shows is Name, Kind and Last Opened. And, I have to rightclick on the file to find its location. How do you set up a column that shows file location?
  2. Kyeris macrumors 6502

    Jul 19, 2008
    Somewhere in Texas
    Command click on the top bar where name, date modified, etc is, and click on Show View Options. Your options on what you can sort by are there. Whatever's there is what you get, not sure if theres anything else that will let you sort by anything else.
  3. GGJstudios macrumors Westmere


    May 16, 2008
    If you left click on any item in Finder, it shows the path to that item in the toolbar at the bottom (no need to right-click):
    Picture 5.jpg

    There's not an option to add a "Location" column in Finder.
  4. r.j.s Moderator emeritus


    Mar 7, 2007
    If you have that option turned on.

    View > Show Path Bar ...
  5. Kyeris macrumors 6502

    Jul 19, 2008
    Somewhere in Texas
    You have to enable the path bar though, don't you?
  6. kem103 thread starter macrumors newbie

    Jun 14, 2009
    That is SO disappointing. Surely, there is a way to display the location of files in a Finder column. How are you guys doing this? That is basic in any file search: To know where something is. A column display of file location is basic

    The file management in Apple OS is disappointing that I wonder if I'm misunderstanding the robustness of the OS .

    1. When I save a screen capture, it will only save on my desktop, with a generic title "picture 1". No option to save as "jpg", assign a file name or select a location.

    2. Apple OS will not allow me to save any files from webmail to my external drive. The Apple support said that it because I have a MyBook external drive that is for PCs. So, it appears that I'll have to have two external drives and use two computers.

    3. I can't view locations of files in the search results in a column without individually clicking on every file.

    I switched to Apple for stability and the enthusiasm of the Apple community convinced me that Apple OS was robust. Sorry to be so negative but I'm really disappointed.
  7. GGJstudios macrumors Westmere


    May 16, 2008
    Yes, I leave it on all the time.
    Finder and Spotlight are both sadly lacking in many respects. Windows Explorer is much more robust and functional. A few examples:
    • Spotlight won't search the Library folder
    • Very few columns are available in Finder
    • Even fewer columns are available in Finder Search Results
  8. kasakka macrumors 68020

    Oct 25, 2008
    I find this is very convenient because it's easy to grab multiple pictures this way. Moving and renaming them afterwards is less of a chore than choosing the place to save plus filename for each screenshot.

    If it's formatted to NTFS, OSX can't write to it. You can install Paragon NTFS or NTFS-3G (free) for NTFS write support.

    Just buy Path Finder. I agree that Finder is a terrible file browser, I never use it. Path Finder does tons of things 100 times better.
  9. GGJstudios macrumors Westmere


    May 16, 2008
    To change the default format for screencap images, in, type:
    defaults write type jpg (or whatever filetype you choose)​
    To change the default folder for screencap images, in, type:
    defaults write location "/Users/username/Desktop/screencaps" (or whatever path you want)​
  10. mrchinchilla macrumors 6502


    Mar 6, 2009
    I agree, like leaking memory and crashing...
    It's definitely not worth the money. If it were free, sure but it's not, and it's bloated.
  11. kem103 thread starter macrumors newbie

    Jun 14, 2009
    Thank you! I'll download Path Finder from Cocoatech.

    Re: Paragon's NTFS - Do I have to have both operating systems on my Mac? I've been hesitant to install Windows PC on Apple because of Window's registry inclination to corruption, etc.

    Thanks for the tip on editing I'm a bit hesitant about editing system files. Is that what that is?

    One thing I'll say in praise of Apple, the community is great! Talk about fast and excellent responses!
  12. Steve-M macrumors regular

    Jun 12, 2009
    Highlight any file in Finder and press command+I on your keyboard. From there you will be presented with the name of the file, spotlight comments, size on disk, where (path of file), created date, modified date, if it was downloaded the url of where it was downloaded from, name and extension, opens with (default program that opens the file, which you can change for a individual file, or all files like it), Sharing & Permissions which is also changeable if you have admin rights on the machine.

    OS X is a very robust operating system, once you learn how to use it. But one thing it is not, and never will be, is Windows. Give yourself some time to get use to the differences, then determine which you prefer.
  13. GGJstudios macrumors Westmere


    May 16, 2008
    No, you're not editing system files. You're editing your own preferences. The changes I posted will not affect other users who log into the same Mac.
  14. kasakka macrumors 68020

    Oct 25, 2008
    I haven't had the 5.x.x versions ever crash and haven't noticed any memory problems either. It also starts a lot faster than previous versions.

    Nope. Paragon NTFS as well as NTFS-3G are simply NTFS support drivers for OSX. Paragon is faster but not free. I use NTFS-3G because it seems a bit more stable, with Paragon I sometimes had strange leftovers when deleting files from a NTFS drive. They would show up in trashcan as undeletable files and the only fix was to run chkdsk in Windows. Haven't had any of that with NTFS-3G.
  15. SnowLeopard2008 macrumors 604


    Jul 4, 2008
    Silicon Valley
    Path Finder sucks because it's worse than Finder and costs money.

    To see the location of the File, just go to View > Show Path Bar. Apple assumes that Mac users know where the file they just navigated to is. Makes sense right?

    To save files to your external, format to a filesystem that isn't older than you are, namely HFS+. My FAT drives read, but to access NTFS (default Windows filesystem) drives, you need that Paragon NTFS thing. HFS+ is more efficient, which is why Windows doesn't use it. They like to stick to ancient things that only work because the newer stuff they make doesn't (like XP over Vista).

    To change the screen capture settings, just copy/paste those command-line commands. JPEG really blows in terms of quality, especially if not compressed correctly (most images aren't). PNG is more efficient (smaller file) and better quality, which is why Windows doesn't use it by default. You can rename screen captures by clicking them and changing their name. Not so hard is it?
  16. kasakka macrumors 68020

    Oct 25, 2008
    So what exactly is wrong with Path Finder? You basically just said it sucks but no real reason why. I like it because it's a lot more like Windows' file browser (which is crappy on XP too but pretty good in Win7). I just wish Finder could be totally replaced with Path Finder so I wouldn't have to use it and notice how it doesn't have any of the features I like.

    You also do know that NTFS has been updated over the years, right? In any case to the user the filesystem generally doesn't matter at all as long as you can read and write.

    If you format the external drive to HFS+ you'll have trouble reading it in Windows, should you want to use it that way. Then you'd have to buy MacDrive for Windows. The free NTFS-3G installed on OSX to read/write NTFS drives is the cheapest and easiest solution. If you're going to use it just on OSX, then by all means format it to HFS+.

    As for JPEG vs PNG..JPEG is good for things with lots of color changes, like photographs whereas PNG is ideal for things like line art, vector graphics and incidently screenshots because most programs have lots of flat, single color stuff. With the higher quality JPEG compression settings vs PNG I don't think you can notice any real difference in most images, but JPEG may often have the upper hand in file size. I usually try both formats to see which gets the best compromise between image quality and file size for whatever purpose the picture is for.

Share This Page