Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Leopard Build 9A377a Details Emerging
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Pathfinder
They should use Pathfinder and complain less....... Although the Finder would be greatly improved with tabbed windows, a memory of view preferences, and a unified theme, it functions well enough for easy and simple navigation. Leopard will most likely breathe new life into it, and bring on enhancements in style.
They should use Pathfinder and complain less....... Although the Finder would be greatly improved with tabbed windows, a memory of view preferences, and a unified theme, it functions well enough for easy and simple navigation. Leopard will most likely breathe new life into it, and bring on enhancements in style.
They should use Pathfinder and complain less....... Although the Finder would be greatly improved with tabbed windows, a memory of view preferences, and a unified theme, it functions well enough for easy and simple navigation. Leopard will most likely breathe new life into it, and bring on enhancements in style.
Sure, if it's just an interface issue, people who complain would probably be better served using replacement file managers. But when network file system support is broken it does reflect badly on the OS as a whole (see the post in the previous page about Finder freezing because of a network share becoming unavailable. That, I remember well from the last time I used Tiger)
I don't mind the wait for 10.5. I got my first Mac(last of the 20in G5 iMac) in Dec. 05 as a Christmas gift. I use to be a "want it now!" person so I got into doing beta testing just to "have it now", and it sucks. The bugs/crashes/even reinstalling my os(PC) was enough.
Besides I will grad. from college in Dec. 07 and will buy a new fully-loaded iMac at that point. 10.5 will have been out for a while and any major bugs will have been addressed by then. When it comes out you'll love it.
- Scott
Besides I will grad. from college in Dec. 07 and will buy a new fully-loaded iMac at that point. 10.5 will have been out for a while and any major bugs will have been addressed by then. When it comes out you'll love it.
- Scott
You have some statistics to back that claim up?
I know lots of Mac users and most of them hate the Finder and how slow and eccentric (to put it nicely) it is. A lot of its problems don't start to show up until you're using a Mac in a professional environment, dealing with thousands of files and many servers. Then things start to get ugly. So even if "most Mac users think it's great", most of them are probably not using it in that situation and therefore don't see the not-so-great side to it.
Anyway, it hardly matters. You only need to use Windows Explorer and then the Finder to compare and see it for yourself. It doesn't matter how many people are (or are not) complaining. It's an easily observable fact that the Finder needs serious improvement.
Finder is a disaster that just happens to be generally adequate, sort of like Windows itself. I wouldn't compare it to Windows Explorer as a higher bar, though--Explorer has its own share of problems, and first among them is that when one window goes down, it takes all of them with it and it doesn't remember your session. It also seems to have a problem with insisting random folders are music folders and it will completely freeze up on several local network browsing operations, even in Vista, which otherwise greatly improved Explorer's handling of network shares.
Nautilus is pretty basic and when I used it tended to be crash-prone. Konqueror is much more stable, but it's also bulky and ungainly. I'd say from an overall usability standpoint, Finder and Windows Explorer come out on top but for stability Konqueror takes the cake. I wish Finder had a drag and drop path bar with breadcrumb style navigation like Windows Explorer and that it would background failed or timing-out network operations. I'd actually like it then, instead of simply tolerating it. Bring on some improved sorting (like the ability to keep folders together at the top regardless of view mode) and a more powerful, task-sensitive sidebar and I'd be really pleased.
Path Finder is a reasonably good interim solution, but it suffers from the same over-featured Swiss-army knife bulk that Konqueror does. I don't see the need or use for tabbed Finder windows, since if I have multiple windows open, it's generally because I'm dragging files around or am comparing windows side by side--which tabs would impede.
Finder is a crock of ****. Anyone who says different is either the busker who developed it or the busker's mother.
Finder
The sad thing is, when Avie Tevanian first designed Cheetah, (10.0) he opted not to have a Finder at all. After an overwhelming uproar from the Mac community, the Finder was integrated back into OS X, albeit, with minimal effort. One only hopes that it receives the attention it deserves in Leopard, and that the Finder becomes one of those 'Hidden Features' of the new interface.
The sad thing is, when Avie Tevanian first designed Cheetah, (10.0) he opted not to have a Finder at all. After an overwhelming uproar from the Mac community, the Finder was integrated back into OS X, albeit, with minimal effort. One only hopes that it receives the attention it deserves in Leopard, and that the Finder becomes one of those 'Hidden Features' of the new interface.
The same way other OSes do file management without Finder: with a different file manager. The OS X Finder isn't really "Finder" in the classical sense--it's a bastardized mix of metaphors. The old Finder was wholly spatial and the OS X Finder is part navigational. They tried to kill it and start over with OS X, but Mac users wouldn't have it. A clear demonstration of how actions have consequences
.
The old engineer in me is just in love with the *nix heritage of OSX and cannot wait to see even more with a possible unix certification.
The new OSX user in me would really enjoy an Illuminous look with that halo effect!
Sort of your great unix with great apps and a really trick GUI. Man am I glad I never got windoze msce certified!
The new OSX user in me would really enjoy an Illuminous look with that halo effect!
Sort of your great unix with great apps and a really trick GUI. Man am I glad I never got windoze msce certified!
The same way other OSes do file management without Finder: with a different file manager. The OS X Finder isn't really "Finder" in the classical sense--it's a bastardized mix of metaphors. The old Finder was wholly spatial and the OS X Finder is part navigational. They tried to kill it and start over with OS X, but Mac users wouldn't have it. A clear demonstration of how actions have consequences
What do you mean by spatial, like I dunno, I am having a hard time picturing a specific example, lol.
Spatial file managers don't have forward and back buttons, and each folder occupies its own window. If you open a folder, it springs up into a new window, always. The window containing that folder stays open and moves to the background, with the open folder having an "open folder" icon. There are other details to it which you can find on Google if you're interested or you can PM me. Windows Explorer is navigational (similar in operation to a web browser).
Hey, I wouldn't mind if Christmas came this spring alongside leopard!
I don't think Apple's bug-eliminating strategy will experience a radical change: 10.5.0 won't be perfect, though possibly more stable than previous releases. In the past, Apple has thrived on a system where they introduce bug fixes and new features continually through V.x updates. People are generally happy with that equilibrium. As for New OSes, they finish off the last 10.x release the best they can, and then they add new features and sell it. So as clean as Tiger is getting to be, you can't hope that Leopard will build features ontop of this squeaky clean foundation. 10.3.9 still has bugs, there's no hopes in them being fixed now. Apple is considerate enough to provide security updates (and biggies like that), but it's obviously not of primary consideration anymore. It would be nice to have a tollerably error resistant system, but they won't push the launch agenda past the spring time frame (I seriously hope not, it would mean a meltdown on the consistency they've established).
Then most mac user's aren't really using it on anything other then an isolated system or with a handful of files. There are pages and pages of lists on why the finder is a heaping pile of ****. This is in the same vein as people who think Internet Explorer is a perfectly fine browser. Just because you haven't used anything else doesn't make it superior. It just makes your view narrow and limited.
Here. Have him read this: http://arstechnica.com/articles/paedia/finder.ars
I wish to god Apple would hire John Siracusa to lead a OS X Finder revamp committee. He is my Mac god. Not thee God. Just a god.
I've not read a single post he's made that I haven't agreed with.
Finder does fine for the average user. It's only the Pro's that seem to complain about it. I'm not sure how the apples market is split though? are there more home users, or are most apple users Pros??
It depends how you define Pro. The main problem I have is when the beachball spins for a while while the finder waits for something to happen. Interface-wise I find it fine.
However - look at how you find your photos in iPhoto. Look at how you access your Music. and Mail messages. Add Spotlight. Play with server & local files (& some on an iPod) and throw in online storage so you can access your information anwhere. Mix them together with the finder.... and .. actually we get a bit of a mess
I wouldn't be surprised if Apple is working very hard on a new metaphor for accessing our information, and I'm sure there is an amazing way of doing it that we'll see in the next few years. Perhaps they're trying to put it into Leopard, perhaps not.
Um, I think that most Mac-users would describe Finder as "meh". I can't really see anyone think that "Yes! Finder is really really great!".
I dont think finder is okay for even average users... for example hitting the back button doesnt bring you back to the directory you entered.... if you have 20 dirs its pretty annoying to scroll back down.
No I dont wanna use path this should be a basic function of finder to remember what dir you entered.
No I dont wanna use path this should be a basic function of finder to remember what dir you entered.