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

881–890 of 1001 posts

Re: The new MacBook

#881

Post by muro »

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/

anyone knows something similar on os-x? my main missing tool from windows/linux. maybe I should try double commander on os-x...

Re: The new MacBook

#882

Post by spronkey »

WorldWideWayne wrote: post #841
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…

What could your problem with Windows Explorer possibly be? It is generally considered to be the gold standard as far as I know. It's far better more robust than Finder, it's got a much more powerful plugin environment and the keyboard acceleration actually makes sense, unlike Finder.

If there was one thing I could take from Windows and shoehorn into OS X, it would be Explorer. By far the best, by far.

Re: The new MacBook

#883

Post by vacri »

RaleyField wrote: post #766
mrbabbage wrote: post #668

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Have you tried Dolphin on Linux? It's absolutely the best graphical file shell I've ever used: - integrated command line whose PWD matches the directory shown in the graphic view. This is killer. - automatic numbering if you rename a bunch of files. - a tab-completeable navigation bar. - integrated context menu items (e.g. send via email, compress, encrypt, convert file type). - pretty, Apple-style image previews. I…

> pretty I'd have comments on other points as well but if there is one thing KDE apps generally aren't then they consistently aren't pretty. I know, eye of beholder, but it's almost as bad as TK. In the link you provided there are: - grooved borders between every second UI element. - icons are way too colorful with gradients everywhere. - underscore hints on menus are ugly. - places panel takes up way too much space…

underscore hints on menus are ugly

Turn off that option in the OS; it's not an app thing. One of the nice things about KDE is that it still gives you old-school configurability.

Re: The new MacBook

#884

Post by _b8r0 »

nsxwolf wrote: post #561
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…

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…

> Curious - what do Finder complainers consider the gold standard of file browsers that Finder should aspire to be?

I'm a big fan of the approach Directory Opus used on the Amiga. On Linux I'm pretty much a full time midnight commander user, on OSX I use forklift. The latter's not as full featured as DOpus but it gets the basics right.

Re: The new MacBook

#885

Post by unfamiliar »

mrbabbage wrote: post #668
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…

Have you tried Dolphin on Linux? It's absolutely the best graphical file shell I've ever used: - integrated command line whose PWD matches the directory shown in the graphic view. This is killer. - automatic numbering if you rename a bunch of files. - a tab-completeable navigation bar. - integrated context menu items (e.g. send via email, compress, encrypt, convert file type). - pretty, Apple-style image previews. I…

> integrated command line whose PWD matches the directory shown in the graphic view. This is killer.

This does sound good. I have a keyboard shortcut which launches a terminal in the current directory so that is kind of a workaround.

>- automatic numbering if you rename a bunch of files. >- a tab-completeable navigation bar. >- integrated context menu items (e.g. send via email, compress, encrypt, convert file type). >- pretty, Apple-style image previews.

Finder has all of these things.

Re: The new MacBook

#886

Post by unfamiliar »

nostrademons wrote: post #634
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'm a big fan of the Finder of System 7. It seemed to hit the sweet spot where you could do just about everything you needed to easily (it had collapsible tree views, folders, computed folder sizes, drag & drop, copy & paste, labels, etc.), but it didn't try to hide things from you or restrict what you could do, it didn't get too fancy and guess at your common tasks, it actually showed your filesystem instead of Appl…

Sorry, but this doesn't really answer the question for me.

As far as I can tell, the current Finder has all of the things you list as desirable features.

I don't understand what is confusing about the filesystem as it is presented. It is exactly as it appears on disk, with some system folders hidden. Which can be unhidden easily. That's it.

>it didn't get too fancy and guess at your common tasks

I have no idea what this means.

>it was still simple enough that you could wrap your head around exactly how it worked

What one earth, _specifically_, is confusing about the new Finder?

All of the complaints I hear about it are so incredibly vague, like the ones above.

Re: The new MacBook

#887

Post by netheril96 »

nsxwolf wrote: post #561
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…

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 haven't had used any file explorer that perfectly fits my usage pattern because usually it does not matter that much, but Finder is plainly horrible. I cannot open /tmp without using the terminal, there is no "cut" command (I know you can copy then press Alt for "Move to here", but that is non-intuitive and illogical) and the "enter" command renames rather than opens (which one is the more common operation?). These are just on the top of my head.

Basically, Finder never lets me do my work without thinking. I am always tripped one way or another, so usually I just use the terminal instead.

Re: The new MacBook

#888

Post by jdhendrickson »

nsxwolf wrote: post #561
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…

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…

Pathfinder.

Re: The new MacBook

#889

Post by spronkey »

kalleboo wrote: post #796
hrabago wrote: post #576

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm also curious - what about Windows Explorer makes it a painful experience? I learned how to use computers using DOS/Windows and it's what my idea of "correct" is. I'm curious about the other perspective.

I haven't used Windows in a while so maybe these are fixed now. * Directories are sorted separately as if they're some mystical entity that can't be mixed with files. Makes navigating by typing a PITA. * List views can't show or sort by the size of directories. * No spring-loaded folders makes drag and drop a huge PITA. * I find the disclosure triangles to view multiple subdirectories in a single window extremely use…

Sorting directories separately is the best thing ever.

Re: The new MacBook

#890

Post by 72deluxe »

dilap wrote: post #738
72deluxe wrote: post #642

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Perhaps it's to make you buy an AirPort and TimeCapsule instead?

"Make you buy" is sort of a harsh way to cast it :) But yeah, that's probably how they'll imagine you'll use it. Makes sense.

Yes I could have worded that better. I meant to say that it will encourage you to embrace the fulfilling yet utilitarian spectacle of TimeCapsule, emancipating you from the shackles of corded drudgery whilst you transfer files and data with a new reimagined, refreshing perception of the underlying science; TimeMachine: astonishing, complicated yet captivatingly simple in operation, alluring efficacy in motion.
Post reply on HN