What We Want to See in Leopard

[GodBless]

I want Gnome Nautilus instead of the Finder. I'd keep springloaded folders though

Although I haven't used Linux for a while I am bound to think that the file manager you mentioned doesn't include column view (as Mac OS X's Finder does). Also what about Finder's desktop mounting drives--and how about the side bar? Don't you think these features are better too? I also don't think that I'd like the standard keyboard shortcuts with that GUI either. Additionally I don't think the visual aspects are even close to Finder's in reference to artistic design, visual appeal and concise and effective design thoughtfulness.

The last time I used Linux I did notice features that were good (which Apple's Finder still doesn't have) and I'd like some of them to be included in Leopard, however, I don't think that the Finder will see a major update--but I think I will be happy enough about what Leopard will provide for me--I'm happy with Tiger but I will probably be happier with Leopard.

 

[nplima]

Hi!

Although I haven't used Linux for a while I am bound to think that the file manager you mentioned doesn't include column view (as Mac OS X's Finder does).

just to give a bit of context, I've been a PC user for over 15 years, and I got my first Mac last year or so. I use WindowsXP, Linux and OS X and like them all.

The file browser that comes with Gnome Desktop allows you to choose what you want to have on that panel on the left of the list of files. One of the options is to have a list of the "history" of your browsing, which behaves similarly to Finder column view. I happen to prefer the tree view and miss it when I'm using my Mac.

Also what about Finder's desktop mounting drives--and how about the side bar? Don't you think these features are better too?

These features are so good that they've been adopted by Gnome Desktop (and KDE, by the way)

I also don't think that I'd like the standard keyboard shortcuts with that GUI either.

no problem, you can change them

Additionally I don't think the visual aspects are even close to Finder's in reference to artistic design, visual appeal and concise and effective design thoughtfulness.

personal taste goes a long way in that matter, this screenshot is a kind of an experiment as yesterday I downloaded a few "skins" for Gnome that made it look a lot like brushed metal. At work I use something completely different as the desktop themes feature is extemely flexible. here's how two windows look with "history" on one side and "tree-view" on the other:

OS X and Windows are finished products that need to have a consistent look and feel, Linux is a collection of software that you can choose how to fit together. I like to use them all and I'm also eagerly waiting for Leopard

 

[GodBless]

OS X and Windows are finished products that need to have a consistent look and feel, Linux is a collection of software that you can choose how to fit together. I like to use them all and I'm also eagerly waiting for Leopard

That's the point--Linux is a junk yard--a collection of trash so to speak. In reality Apple's OS X is a finished product as you said and that's why it will always be better than Linux. Why build your own car when a company could build a better one? Cars run better when more people test them--same with software. Also if you think the screenshot of that filesystem even comes close to comparing to Finder, you have to be kidding me! Almost every part I looked at is a lot worse than what Finder offers.

Linux is a used car that needs tuning up and a lot of new parts--for example you need to specify better keyboard shortcuts than the defaults. Why would anyone want to spend time working on a used car when you could save time (and money in the long run) buying a new one? The point is that the Linux junk yard might always be free but the new and innovative Mac OS X will always shine brighter, run faster and work better.

 

[MarkCollette]

I wouldn't be soo negative about Linux. Linux isn't so much a used car as it's an R&D lab. That means it's less polished an unified, but has cool new stuff all the time. Anything that Windows or OS X have, it will have a little while later too.

Some people like hanging out in a carpentry work shop in their basement, and some people like hanging out in the kitchen with stainless steel appliances. One shouldn't look down on either, I think.

 

[GodBless]

I wouldn't be soo negative about Linux. Linux isn't so much a used car as it's an R&D lab. That means it's less polished an unified, but has cool new stuff all the time.

Linux wastes time because it lacks standards. A place without rules is set up to house chaos and that is why Linux isn't a well designed OS and will rarely be used professionally. Yes I agree Linux may have some good uses for certain types of development but it will certainly be limited in the types of useful developments that it can help produce--that's for sure. Also a company that wants profit innovates faster than the volunteer society of freeware developers.

Anything that Windows or OS X have, it will have a little while later too.

No Linux will never have an OS experience that OS X provides because it will always be buggy and it will always lack consistency--also it doesn't have anything close to the top of the line programming standards that Apple provides (neither does Windows) for OS X. Why do you think that the average OS X Application is so much better than the average program on Linux and Windows machines? One word answer: Standards.

Some people like hanging out in a carpentry work shop in their basement, and some people like hanging out in the kitchen with stainless steel appliances. One shouldn't look down on either, I think.

I don't just use my computer for hanging out. I like to use a computer that is ready for me to use properly. When I get into my car I want the engine to work flawlessly without any major problems so it doesn't break down in the middle of a drive--as such, when I work on a big project I don't want my computer to not work in the middle of a delicate and important process. When I press Command+C I want Finder to copy text or a file; when I press Command+E I want it to eject my flash thumb drive or a CD. Sure you can set up Linux to do this with a little bit of modifications but why not have every Linux box have the same thoughtful standards from the start? Linux has a lot there but it is a messy room with Wal-Mart quality substance--OS X, on the other hand, is a large mansion-sized room that has everything you need (at the highest luxurious quality might I add) right where you need it, always (no pun intended in reference to Wal-Mart).

 

[Fukui]

File Type & Icon Associations!

It's laughable at times in Tiger. Here's an example:

If you have .RTF and .DOC files all set to open with Pages, then they will have the blank/generic file icon, despite opening with Pages. Ofcourse you can change the icon manually on each blank file but this isn't exactly a solution as you would need to do it everytime you create a new file.

What also gets me is that if you did happen to have WORD on your machine, and you still wanted .doc files to open with pages, the icon for those files would still be blank even though there's an icon right there on your machine especially for those types of files. The only way to get a word icon for word files is to have them opening all the time with Word or by changing each file manually as above.

This is the same with RTF files, textedit has an icon for RTF files, but because you want to edit them in Pages you have to put up with a blank icon because there isn't an icon for RTF files inside the Pages package.

I know Mac users tend to scoff at Windows users and vica versa. But, in this instance it's laughable that such a simple thing is made almost impossible to the average user.

This is nothing to do with OS X and everything to do with pages. If you set the file to open with a particular app, it uses the icon that that application provides. Pages doesn't have icons for those file types, so the OS has to use blank icons....

 

[nplima]

That's the point--Linux is a junk yard--a collection of trash so to speak. In reality Apple's OS X is a finished product as you said and that's why it will always be better than Linux.

This remark is just rude and uncalled for, especially after your first post where you wrote that you haven't tried linux recently.

As for the rest of your post, it's your opinion, your taste, your experience. Some of it is true, some is not - the overall speed of the system is an important point where OS X lags behind Gnome and KDE (and Win XP by the way). If curiosity and will to try new better ways does not drive your interest in computers, that's fine, just don't dismiss the thousands that feel differently, because if it weren't for them there's a lot of good software products that wouldn't exist, such as the one that allows us to have this conversation.

Quote:
Originally Posted by GodBless
Although I haven't used Linux for a while I am bound to think[...]

that just says it all, I'm probably wasting my time.

 

[GodBless]

As for the rest of your post, it's your opinion, your taste, your experience. Some of it is true, some is not

If you want to call me a liar, specifically list out what I said wrong--otherwise no one will believe you and you will look like a fool.

- the overall speed of the system is an important point where OS X lags behind Gnome and KDE (and Win XP by the way).

Speed is a ambiguous term. If all the averages of speeds were considered OS X would win the speed contest--by far. Just because a rat can run faster than a turtle by no means should lead one to the conclusion that the rat is a better animal.

If curiosity and will to try new better ways does not drive your interest in computers, that's fine, just don't dismiss the thousands that feel differently, because if it weren't for them there's a lot of good software products that wouldn't exist, such as the one that allows us to have this conversation.

Curiosity about technology does drive me--if it didn't then why would have I started this thread--and why would I continue to actively read and/or respond to every post that comes along to it. I am happy with the companies and other individuals and groups of people that produce good software and who update it often.

This remark is just rude and uncalled for, especially after your first post where you wrote that you haven't tried linux recently.

that just says it all, I'm probably wasting my time.

I have recently had a conversation with an all out Linux user and I often read news about Linux and therefore I do think I can comment wisely about this topic. Have you used every type of Linux? So (with the same standards you judged me with) how can you doubt my credibility but still comment about Linux in general yourself? Perhaps from your definition, Mac OS X could be considered a type of Linux since it is based on BSD Unix--but I think it is too different (since it doesn't have the basic standards that all types of Linux have) to be considered Linux.

 

[GodBless]

As for the rest of your post, it's your opinion, your taste, your experience. Some of it is true, some is not

If you want to call me a liar be specific on what I said wrong--otherwise no one will believe you and you will look like a fool.

- the overall speed of the system is an important point where OS X lags behind Gnome and KDE (and Win XP by the way).

Speed is a ambiguous term. If all the averages of speed were considered OS X would win the speed contest--by far. Just because a rat can run faster than a turtle by no means should lead one to the conclusion that it is a better animal.

If curiosity and will to try new better ways does not drive your interest in computers, that's fine, just don't dismiss the thousands that feel differently, because if it weren't for them there's a lot of good software products that wouldn't exist, such as the one that allows us to have this conversation.

Curiosity about technology does drive me--if it didn't why would have I started this thread--and why would I continue to actively read every post that comes along to it. I am happy with the companies that produce good software and who update it often.

This remark is just rude and uncalled for, especially after your first post where you wrote that you haven't tried linux recently.

that just says it all, I'm probably wasting my time.

I have recently had a conversation with an all out Linux user and I often read news about Linux so I do think I can comment wisely about this. Have you used every type of Linux? So how can you doubt my credibility but still comment about Linux yourself? Perhaps from your definition, Mac OS X could be considered a type of Linux since it is based on BSD Unix--but I think it is too different (since it doesn't have the basic standards that all types of Linux have) to be considered Linux.

 

[nazmac21]

Upgraded Kernel
CPU controls (High-Normal-Low) High for gaming, Low for running cool
GPU controls (same as CPU controls but are for the GPU)
Dock on Top option
Space Theme option

 

[GodBless]

CPU controls (High-Normal-Low) High for gaming, Low for running cool

This is already possible in Tiger (Mac OS X 10.4). Just open the System Preferences Application and select the "Energy Saver" option in the "Hardware" section--then click on the "Option" tab. The option called "Processor Performance" is close to the bottom of the window.

Dock on Top option

This is already possible with TinkerTool (linked here). I don't think that it should be a standard feature because it might confuse some people and plus it is quite difficult to use.

Space Theme option

That would be cool especially in reference to Leopard's Time Machine.

 

[nazmac21]

This is already possible in Tiger (Mac OS X 10.4). Just open the System Preferences Application and select the "Energy Saver" option in the "Hardware" section--then click on the "Option" tab. The option called "Processor Performance" is close to the bottom of the window.

Apple should make a better one. An ability to choose the processor speed of your Mac. From 1Ghz (running cool) to 3Ghz or higher (for gaming).

 

[GodBless]

Apple should make a better one. An ability to choose the processor speed of your Mac. From 1Ghz (running cool) to 3Ghz or higher (for gaming).

Good point. I don't like my laptop's fan turning on and off as often as it does.

 

[Manic Mouse]

I have to agree that LINUX is a junk-yard compared to OSX. It's a jumble of disconnected ideas and programs thrown together with little or no elegance.

I tried LINUX just under a year ago and it felt like going back to Win95. It ran fast, but it sure wasn't pretty or useful.

 

[GodBless]

I have to agree that LINUX is a junk-yard compared to OSX. It's a jumble of disconnected ideas and programs thrown together with little or no elegance.

I tried LINUX just under a year ago and it felt like going back to Win95. It ran fast, but it sure wasn't pretty or useful.

Good summary. I had exactly the same kind of experience.

 

[PNW]

I have to agree that LINUX is a junk-yard compared to OSX. It's a jumble of disconnected ideas and programs thrown together with little or no elegance.

I tried LINUX just under a year ago and it felt like going back to Win95. It ran fast, but it sure wasn't pretty or useful.

First If you want to make an honest comparison of OS features you can't just say Linux, you need to specify the distro. They are all quite different with their own pluses and minuses. When I decided to try Linux 3 years ago I started out with Debian and hated it. I spoke with a few friends who run Linux at home and they recommended Fedora. I tried it and found it more to my liking than Debian, but it still wasn't what I really wanted. Another friend suggested Suse. I tried it and fell in love with it. For me, it's better than Windows or OS X (between home and work I spend time in all 3 OSs). Ubuntu is also supposed to be a very user friendly distro, but I've never tried it. Even after deciding on a distro you still have the option of choosing Gnome or KDE as a graphical interface. Both have their own distinct look and feel. Which can then be further customized to your liking.

On the whole Linux is much more like a custom garage than a junk yard. It takes more work up front than going to the dealer and picking the car that is closest to your liking, but you come out with exactly what you want, plus you can load it on almost any hardware you like. This is not for everyone, but that doesn't make it bad.

 

[ksgant]

When I was running Linux, I was running Gentoo. It was a great learning experience and I ran it as my only OS for about a year and a half. Gentoo (at the time) is a distro you build from scratch, compiling everything. Back when I ran it there was basically a 10 page install manual that I printed out. No installer, no graphics to help you along, no windowing system during install. Just you and the terminal and that's it. As I said, I learned quite a bit about the file structures and what was what and why you needed it.

Tinkering with a car is a good analogy. In the time I used Linux I was constantly tweaking this and that, switching entire windowing systems (from Gnome to KDE to OpenStep to Enlightenment and others), and then after trying out a windowing system I had to tweak THAT to get it to run the way I wanted. It was a never-ending quest to get things working and tweaking. Plus, it seemed that many of the windowing schemes and themes were all trying to get Linux to look like OS X. There were quite a few things I liked here and there, but I just wasted so much time futzing with the UI to get it to work the way I wanted. It was fun for a while, but it was too much of a distraction.

 

[PNW]

I haven't tried Gentoo but that sounds a lot like my experience with Debian. Suse recognized all the hardware in the box, had a full GUI install, and has been running on the computer in the family room with no major problems ever since.

And my auto analogy wasn't meant to reflect the old Fiat that requires most your weekends just to start up in the morning. Rather the custom chopper that once built is everything you want and none of what you don't

 

[MarkCollette]

And my auto analogy wasn't meant to reflect the old Fiat that requires most your weekends just to start up in the morning. Rather the custom chopper that once built is everything you want and none of what you don't

Screw this, I'm buying a chopper, instead of a Mac!

 

[GodBless]

Screw this, I'm buying a chopper, instead of a Mac!

A Mac can be customized more easily (and more efficiently) than a Linux machine because there is much more professional software to it (OS X has developing tools like a garage with a strong new hammer made out of a good material and a shiny new tool kit to go along with it). It's the programming environment that helps OS X have the advantage over Windows and Linux.

 

[MarkCollette]

A Mac can be customized more easily (and more efficiently) than a Linux machine because there is much more professional software to it (OS X has developing tools like a garage with a strong new hammer made out of a good material and a shiny new tool kit to go along with it). It's the programming environment that helps OS X have the advantage over Windows and Linux.

Right, but the Mac can't fly like a helicopter, so it still sucks

 

[GodBless]

Right, but the Mac can't fly like a helicopter, so it still sucks

Prove to me Linux can fly--it's a always buggy piece of software with time consuming glitches and un-streamlined roadblocks (or sky-blocks in the case of a helicopter). Too bad the helicopter crashes too much. Now Mac OS X--Mac OS X can really fly. Please don't tell me Wikipedia is a better source as a dictionary when compared to the Oxford American Dictionary. Open source will always be open to problems.

Oh yeah, Mac OS X can drive a car--really.

 

[MarkCollette]

Prove to me Linux can fly--it's a always buggy piece of software with time consuming glitches and un-streamlined roadblocks (or sky-blocks in the case of a helicopter). Too bad the helicopter crashes too much. Now Mac OS X--Mac OS X can really fly.

OH MY GOD. Can you kill my joke any more? I wasn't arguing for Linux or Mac or whatever. I was saying that I don't care which computer is better, since having a helicopter that you can fly to work or whatever would clearly be infinitely cooler.

 

[nplima]

I haven't tried Gentoo but that sounds a lot like my experience with Debian.

Gentoo is a completely different kind of beast. It is meant to be fine tuned in every little aspect. some people like that as a hobby, others need it mostly for security reasons or just pure research. the folks that develop Gentoo aren't really aiming to get millions of normal desktop computer users to use it. Regular users will be happier with Red Hat, Mandriva, Ubuntu, Suse, ...

[...]

And my auto analogy wasn't meant to reflect the old Fiat that requires most your weekends just to start up in the morning. Rather the custom chopper that once built is everything you want and none of what you don't

This quote reminds me of one thing that I was going to reply here the other day: just because it is possible to customize a lot of things on your normal Linux desktop User Interface, doesn't mean that you have to. In fact, as most distibutions install KDE or Gnome Desktop, these default settings will provide a desktop that will look and feel as adequate as any modern OS user interface does (and it's been like this since at least 2002, I don't know what kind of experience some nay-sayers have about this matter...)

One important difference is *if* the user decides to change a few things according to personal taste. Under Windows XP there are a limited set of Themes that you can adapt but not abandon completely; under OS X you can't even change the font size of the menus unless you use after-market utilities; with Gnome and KDE you can change a lot of these preferences and all applications will use the same theme and settings.