Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The new MacBook

apple.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

591–600 of 1001 posts

Re: The new MacBook

#591

Post by hultner »

etrautmann wrote: post #572
nsxwolf wrote: post #561

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Curious - what do Finder complainers consider the gold standard of file browsers that Finder should aspire to be? I do most of my file management at the command line so I don't experience the pain of Finder very often, and I've generally been able to get Finder to do what I want without much fuss. Windows Explorer is, to me, a painful experience (but its 1980s DOS command line is so much worse) I've found the various…

features from pathfinder come to mind: 1) somewhere to copy the file path without opening a "get info" dialog 2) tree-based view instead of the HORRIBLE thin columns that never auto-size to display filenames in a way you can view 3) ability to open command line from whatever folder you're in I could go on and on - these are all trivial to implement and they never ever happen. number 2 is one of the most irritating of…

I used to be a Path Finder guy but since I moved almost all my file management to the terminal I haven't even installed Path Finder since I switched to a Retina MacBook Pro in late 2013. But I could definitely agree as a power- or semi poweruser Path Finder seems much more sensible but to be honest my mother understands Finder so much better than Path Finder and The Explorer on Windows. For me OS X probably peaked around Snow Leopard but there's probably a lot of novice users that like the new features and iOS-users that switched to OS X probably likes the similarities in App Store, Launchpad, etc. Sadly it feels that Apple is giving us powerusers less and less love.

Re: The new MacBook

#592

Post by sliverstorm »

sytelus wrote: post #518

I'm actually quite unhappy with this obsession with "thinner and lighter" mantra which throws away features at the expense of saving 0.01mm of thickness. These new computers don't have interfaces like Ethernet, DVD player, common interfaces for video. All of these is supposed to be outdated while it is very clearly not. You can't even do trivial upgrades like RAM let alone putting in new bigger SSD. These things are…

There are still many laptops with all the interfaces and features, right? Beauty of choice, and all that.

Re: The new MacBook

#593

Post by azinman2 »

So in switching from thunderbolt to usb-c, I'm wondering about the technical reasons. They went from 20-40g/s of thunderbolt to 5 in this version of usb-c, which is quite a reduction by itself. My understanding of previous USB specs is that USB is poll (and thus creates a lot of CPU load), versus firewire which was push. Is USB 3.1 now finally push?

Re: The new MacBook

#594

Post by wowzer »

eblanshey wrote: post #528
nkoren wrote: post #261

This is a beautiful machine. Once again, Apple excels at hardware. But what the living hell is going wrong with Apple's desktop software? OS X and Apple's applications suite have been getting steadily worse with every release. Look at the App store: the latest releases of OS X, iPhoto, iMovie, Pages, and Numbers are (in stark contrast to earlier versins) all rated at 2.5/5 stars, with the plurality being 1-star revie…

Anyone know how viable it is to wipe it and use Ubuntu with it?

Anyone know if Ubuntu will do the retina justice?

Re: The new MacBook

#595

Post by reilly3000 »

JBiserkov wrote: post #575
nsxwolf wrote: post #561

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Curious - what do Finder complainers consider the gold standard of file browsers that Finder should aspire to be? I do most of my file management at the command line so I don't experience the pain of Finder very often, and I've generally been able to get Finder to do what I want without much fuss. Windows Explorer is, to me, a painful experience (but its 1980s DOS command line is so much worse) I've found the various…

I personally swear by Total Commander[0] (previously Windows Commander). [0] http://www.ghisler.com/

Looks like truly handy software. but my god that website. I mean, if you have have a counter that old, I wouldn't touch it either, but the rest... oiy. I want keybindings for browsing through screenshots, damnit!

Re: The new MacBook

#597

Post by serve_yay »

nkoren wrote: post #261

This is a beautiful machine. Once again, Apple excels at hardware. But what the living hell is going wrong with Apple's desktop software? OS X and Apple's applications suite have been getting steadily worse with every release. Look at the App store: the latest releases of OS X, iPhoto, iMovie, Pages, and Numbers are (in stark contrast to earlier versins) all rated at 2.5/5 stars, with the plurality being 1-star revie…

I don't really think such reviews are a good metric of anything, but I concur. The software quality has definitely taken a decline in recent years.

Re: The new MacBook

#598

Post by dasil003 »

darcyparker wrote: post #559
SiVal wrote: post #509

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because you can't really tell how well software is working when looking at the device edge-on, and that's apparently the way Apple looks at them most of the time. I mean this more metaphorically than literally, but I'm so tired of complaints about the ridiculously primitive Finder being met with, "the edge of the iMac now appears even thinner, now that we've repositioned formerly convenient connectors and such into a…

I agree - I'd love to see them re-think Finder. I just don't grok Finder... I do most of my work in the terminal and occasionally midnight commander or nerdtree inside vim. I tried free ones like muCommander but don't like the overhead of starting a java app... Similarly I don't want the overhead of running an X server so I can use an X based file manager. And I don't want to buy some 3rd party File Manager. We shoul…

I think the problem is that file management does not fit Apple's vision for the future. It is simply too abstract a task with too many use cases to really design something simple and elegant in the spirit of how Apple normally approaches problems. There are obviously a million ways to make the Finder better than what it is, but what Apple really wants to do is kill it entirely. Of course they're nowhere near being able to kill it, so instead they hold it at arm's length as a necessary evil.

In the meantime, if, like me, you are stuck on OS X because it's the best GUI for a *nix now and in the foreseeable future, I suggest buying PathFinder (http://www.cocoatech.com/pathfinder/) to bridge the gap. It's certainly a much better tool than Finder or Windows Explorer.

Re: The new MacBook

#599

Post by ryaneager »

mdeslaur wrote: post #11

Seriously? Couldn't they have put _two_ ports in it so you can plug something in while it's being charged without lugging around a usb hub?

The display adaptor has a spot to charge from so you can drive a display charge and use USB, all at the same time.

http://store.apple.com/us/product/MJ1L2AM/A/usb-c-vga-multip...

Re: The new MacBook

#600

Post by dan1234 »

geophile wrote: post #579
nsxwolf wrote: post #561

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Curious - what do Finder complainers consider the gold standard of file browsers that Finder should aspire to be? I do most of my file management at the command line so I don't experience the pain of Finder very often, and I've generally been able to get Finder to do what I want without much fuss. Windows Explorer is, to me, a painful experience (but its 1980s DOS command line is so much worse) I've found the various…

How about showing the actual filesystem? Instead of some restricted fictional view? For example, how the hell do you get to /tmp from the Finder? What's with the stupid column per directory level? This is an extremely bad use of display space. Haven't used Windows in a long time, and the equivalent in Linux is useless. (Or, more precisely, I don't use it.) But there are a number of irritations that have been there fo…

Cmd+Shift+G then type /tmp
Post reply on HN