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.
Mac OS X Updates and Next Generation Finder Development
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Does anyone look for files THAT much where it needs to be the focus of an operating system's development?? I guess I just dont get it.
Mr Lizard said:
I agree with th previous post that we should leave all the picture, music stuff in the iLife apps. I hate it how windows tries to open new folders. Is it pictures, is it movies, is music? I never use a folder that contains just pictures, that is what iPhoto 's library is for.
I wish there was a way to search for just filenames, like pre-Spotlight.
Spotlight is not instant. Even in System 7, searching for filenames was extremely fast. Not only that, there's no way to do this in Spotlight, and Spotlight won't search everywhere on the hard disk and won't search untyped files.
Spotlight is not instant. Even in System 7, searching for filenames was extremely fast. Not only that, there's no way to do this in Spotlight, and Spotlight won't search everywhere on the hard disk and won't search untyped files.
Last I looked, they were organized in folders and subfolders....Super Dave said:
What do you mean?
MacsRgr8 said:
It's not a maximize button, it's a zoom button. Usually it expands to show the full contents of the window, not fill up the screen. MacOS has never really been designed around the idea of filling the screen with one window the way it's done in the Windows world, especially with all the dragging and dropping Mac users do between application windows.
gweedo said:And yes... I liked the scroll bars on the left too.
Me too. The reason they were there is because the user's mouse cursor is typically sitting nearer to the left hand side of a window. But they probably put it on the right side so as not to screw up all the legacy apps being ported over.
lawgraphix said:
The features are nice, but Pathfinder 4's interface is so hideous it makes babies cry and elephants spontaneously explode... Overcrowded windows FTL.
AidenShaw said:
Might be talking about the locations of profiles. to find your program folder
sys:\Program Files\Company\App name
sys:\program files\Common Files\Company
How about your profile?
sys:\Documents and Settings\[Profile Name]
How about your Documents?
sys:\Documents and Settings\[Profile Name]\My Documents
How about stuff on the desktop?
sys:\Documents and Settings\[Profile Name]\Desktop
and
sys:\Documents and Settings\All Users\Desktop
How about temp folders where some things are stored?
sys:\Documents and Settings\[Profile Name]\(Turn off hide hidden folders feature first)Local Settings\Temp
Its just messy in 2K/XP
hayesk said:
Ok, let's compare the times.
Back then, the biggest HDs anybody had were 2-3GB (and those were considered huge) and files were much simpler. Nowadays HDs go all the way up into TBs and files can span several GBs. If you used the system 7 find file on an average modern HD it'd most likely take quite a while to search.
P.S. While Spotlight isn't 100% instant on my Mac, it's about 99% instant... nothing as slow as you're describing. I'm inclined to think something is wrong with your Mac.
I hope Apple takes their time and does 10.5 right.
10.5 needs to be an epic jump over 10.4, akin to how OS X was a leap over OS 9.
Make no mistake about it: Microsoft is copying OS X feature for feature, and then adding more so the review will glow. We Apple folks can be all high and mighty about Windows being a rip-off, but MS doesn't care and will simple laugh all the way to the bank.
Plus, good enough good really hurt Apple again like it did in 1995.
Apple needs Leopard to be an epic update. Epic.
10.5 needs to be an epic jump over 10.4, akin to how OS X was a leap over OS 9.
Make no mistake about it: Microsoft is copying OS X feature for feature, and then adding more so the review will glow. We Apple folks can be all high and mighty about Windows being a rip-off, but MS doesn't care and will simple laugh all the way to the bank.
Plus, good enough good really hurt Apple again like it did in 1995.
Apple needs Leopard to be an epic update. Epic.
my oh so small list of requests:
-good finder previews that preview RAW files correctly w/o black boxes
-be able to move and change folder names inside "save" boxes
-FOR THE LOVE OF GOD, fix networking
-make it faster
-make it non-carbon and unify the UI
-good finder previews that preview RAW files correctly w/o black boxes
-be able to move and change folder names inside "save" boxes
-FOR THE LOVE OF GOD, fix networking
-make it faster
-make it non-carbon and unify the UI
SiliconAddict said:Can not sucking be counted as an advanced feature?
Hahaha - best post of the day! Thanks for that...
mkjellman said:
I'd be happy if they did just this. I never really noticed what everyone was talking about when it comes to inconsistent UI's until my last trip into the Apple store. Spent about 45 minutes playing with a DC iMac. Apple REALLY needs to get their act together when it comes to a consolidated UI between the OS and iLife.
OK that and networking...ever time one of my friends comes over with his iBook getting him to hook up to my home server is interesting if you don't get a password right or a username or some other item. The timeout period needs to be WAY shorter.
For these trySiliconAddict said:
> dir %userprofile%
> dir %userprofile%\desktop
> dir %temp% (no "hidden" problem)
You have direct access to the first two in Explorer, no need to traverse the per-user structure underneath most of the time.
Who ever looks in %temp% anyway? Maybe a Unix droid who thinks that it should be used like /tmp, but not a windows wizard.
Not so messy for the naive user - and I thought the question was which filesystem was better (NTFS vs....). Not how files are put in the filesystem.SiliconAddict said:
I really doubt Apple would try to buy Path Finder - to be honest, it's just not ready for prime time on the level of audience that the Finder reaches. Plus I'd be out of a job then...
Path Finder is a specific tool with a somewhat specific audience. It's very usable, but it definitely does not have the elegance or clarity of UI that the Finder has. That said, Path Finder does a heck of a lot more than the Finder does, and we don't have hundreds of thousands of dollars for focus group testing and a team of developers and designers, either.
But I would really hate it if something like Path Finder (in its current state) were adopted by Apple. Whether you hate it or love it, the Finder is still very intuitive and well-designed. Yes, it has issues, but considering every single Mac user uses the Finder at some point, no matter what level of experience they have, it's not that bad.
Path Finder solves a lot of these issues, but the more an application does, the more complex the interface becomes (cf. Photoshop). It's very, very hard to have an interface that scales in intuitiveness based on the skills of the user, and equally as hard to have an application with the reach of the Finder that appeals to all levels.
As some of the comments here show, some people love Path Finder, and some people hate it. <insert quote on the difficulties of pleasing all the people all the time> It'll be the same for the new Finder, no matter what Apple does.
Neil
Path Finder is a specific tool with a somewhat specific audience. It's very usable, but it definitely does not have the elegance or clarity of UI that the Finder has. That said, Path Finder does a heck of a lot more than the Finder does, and we don't have hundreds of thousands of dollars for focus group testing and a team of developers and designers, either.
But I would really hate it if something like Path Finder (in its current state) were adopted by Apple. Whether you hate it or love it, the Finder is still very intuitive and well-designed. Yes, it has issues, but considering every single Mac user uses the Finder at some point, no matter what level of experience they have, it's not that bad.
Path Finder solves a lot of these issues, but the more an application does, the more complex the interface becomes (cf. Photoshop). It's very, very hard to have an interface that scales in intuitiveness based on the skills of the user, and equally as hard to have an application with the reach of the Finder that appeals to all levels.
As some of the comments here show, some people love Path Finder, and some people hate it. <insert quote on the difficulties of pleasing all the people all the time> It'll be the same for the new Finder, no matter what Apple does.
Neil
AidenShaw said:
Yes I've aware of the various environment variables. I script for them all the time with SMS installer when I repackage software. But your average user does not and frankly shouldn't. And you dang well better look into your temp dir from time to time to clean it up.
This is about a month's worth or crap on my work system. I should really delete and defrag this weekend.
Attachments
Just curious, how does XP/Vista score here?mkjellman said:
Why not do the full monty and allow icon view in them, i.e. give them the same options as the Finder. But is this a Finder request?
What exactly? Maybe:
- Automount that works and does not complain when it cannot find server.
- Aliases to servers that work.
Militar said:
What does it do differently than cmd+I?
My one thing...
I miss one and only one thing from Windows - being able to browse networked computers as though they were folders on my computer. None of this browsing for servers, selecting the computer, entering a password, selecting which folder to mount, mounting the folder, finally opening the folder.
It's the only thing I think that Windows kicks OS X's arse in, I'd just have to double click on a computer, double click on a folder and I was there. And while we're at it, show shared printers on networked computers. Setting one up through Printer Setup is a pain in the arse.
I miss one and only one thing from Windows - being able to browse networked computers as though they were folders on my computer. None of this browsing for servers, selecting the computer, entering a password, selecting which folder to mount, mounting the folder, finally opening the folder.
It's the only thing I think that Windows kicks OS X's arse in, I'd just have to double click on a computer, double click on a folder and I was there. And while we're at it, show shared printers on networked computers. Setting one up through Printer Setup is a pain in the arse.