I work as an IT administrator and I have to say I am downright EMBARRASSED about filesharing in the finder. Our company issues an iBook to every employee, many of them have never used Macs before and are amazed by them, but these are people coming from MS environments and to them the filesharing speed is just intolerable. Beachball... beachball... beachball...
to them the filesharing speed is just intolerable. Beachball... beachball... beachball...
If your users are getting beach-balls all the time, something is wrong. I use SMB all the time, and I only get beach-balls when first mounting a share (doesn't last long), and if the network connection is interrupted (e.g. network cable pulled out, Airport dropout). I'm not trying to excuse this behaviour, if the Finder were threaded properly you shouldn't see beach-balls ever. But once the share is mounted, I get perfectly respectable performance.
edit: Just realised you didn't actually specifically mention SMB. For the record, I get perfectly respectable Apple File Sharing performance as well. I'm running 10.3.9 on a 500 MHz Titanium PB with 768 MB RAM.
What sort of network are you using? This is all wireless and not every user has a perfectly optimal signal so that's the biggest bottleneck, but it's horrible opening a folder with many files in it over AFP.
What sort of network are you using? This is all wireless and not every user has a perfectly optimal signal so that's the biggest bottleneck, but it's horrible opening a folder with many files in it over AFP.
I mostly use ethernet, but sometimes I use 802.11b airport. Of course things are worse when I use airport.
Are you using 802.11g? There is no way to get around the fact that when you open a folder, the server must send the client a list of all the files in the folder. If you have flaky airport reception, that will inevitably take a while. As you say, it would be nice if there were a progress indicator. Additionally, the Finder should be threaded better so you could at least do something else in the Finder whilst it is waiting for the file list to arrive.
How about a plugin architecture for the new, leaner, meaner heavily threaded Finder? That way programmers can compensate for Apple's shortcomings wrt FTFF. The finder could be the next killer app, instead of a crusty bag of crap.
Yes, I think the same thing about a lot of programs. I reckon that's what makes most of the high-end apps like Photoshop, Maya etc so good. It's not what they can do but what they allow you to do.
Quote:
Originally posted by 1337_5L4Xx0R
Marvin, Finder's FTP is a joke.
Hehe, just making sure you knew it was there. I thought maybe you were using Panther. I don't think the ftp volume mounting was in 10.3. But yeah, it is a joke. I'm on 4MB wired broadband and I tried to connect to my ftp server. It browsed through the directories very slowly and then I tried opening a file on it and it beachballed for about 10 seconds and then the ftp server disconnected.
Quote:
Originally posted by Mr.H
What sort of network are you using? This is all wireless and not every user has a perfectly optimal signal so that's the biggest bottleneck, but it's horrible opening a folder with many files in it over AFP.
I think the wireless network could well be part of the issue. I tried to hook up a quad G5 with a powerbook over a wireless network so I could work on one and keep the files up to date on the other but it went so slowly that I just went back to using an ethernet cable.
It's just a question of whether it is Apple's filesharing that is bad over wireless or if it's just that the wireless network is bad.
in my opinion the finder works fine... I do think spotlight will eventually mostly replace it! It will be gradual and it will still be needed for Network and USB device style tasks
How can you say that in the face of plenty of examples to the contrary?
I'm not saying that the Finder doesn't work ok for you, but you have to realise that a lot of Mac users think it sucks (for good reason). It therefore needs fixing.
The 100 AI posters and 100+ Ars posters are the people tech companies should listen to if they want an edge.
I don't agree with this. The problem is the people on internet lists are looking at their own needs while ignoring the needs of the 99% of the world that is actually living life and not on internet lists.
A lot of the time people on these lists over think things in one sense, over simplify things in another sense, and often see past the obvious.
For example many times I've seen on these lists someone point a link to a Anandtech article that shows program A is 10% faster than program B. The conclusion everyone comes to is that program B must be utter crap if program A is 10% faster.
While the truth is that you can get the job done fine with program B only that program A is 10% faster. I've seen this with applications, hardware, everything.
Many of the people on Ars are so smart they are dumb.
AI is quite a bit better but sometimes not too far behind.
You must be joking. The finder is the manager of files. No app should ever take over that task. EVER. We are already generating confusion with apps that try to mimic the finder. I have seen more people get all confused about this:"are the songs I see in iTunes files? What happens if I delete them, are they erased?" , total nonsense because it isn't clearly defined to the user that the song you see is a link to a file and not the actual file.
Here's another nonsense: You connect a camera to your Mac, iPhoto automatically launches, creates a new folder, moves the files form the camera to that folder and places the photos in it's library, all this is done behind the scenes, the novice user has no idea the iPhoto just created folders without him knowing. Now, are the pictures he sees the files? How does he know that? And where exactly are the files at?
Anytime you hide info you get into trouble. It's just not a good solution.
Well that is the job of iPhoto and iTunes they are for managing and storing pictures and music. How could they accomplish that task if they did not store and organize these items in the same files.
I wouldn't call the file hidden. Clearly in the tool bar are files called Movies, Music, Pictures. Clearly marked in those files are iPhoto pictures and iTunes music.
I don't see the problem being in the implementation. People just need to know how the system works. When iPhoto imports your pictures it places them in a file called Pictures.
Consistent storage for iPhoto is important because it nondestructively edits pictures. iPhoto needs to know where the original unaltered picture is for this to work.
Doing away with the way Apple currently does this leaves the job to the average user to set up a file, organize thousands of pictures or thousands of songs in that file, then link iPhoto or iTunes to that file.
Of course there is the option in iTunes to store your music whereever you choose.
How can you say that in the face of plenty of examples to the contrary?
I'm not saying that the Finder doesn't work ok for you, but you have to realise that a lot of Mac users think it sucks (for good reason). It therefore needs fixing.
OK... I'll agree to that.
But how are we going to fix it?? Everyone has different ideas and what would work for them won't for others (often.) Siracusa's isn't bad, but it could use Spotlight spicing up. And I'd use his browser mode (go ahead kill me.) We'll see how it goes.
Doing away with the way Apple currently does this leaves the job to the average user to set up a file, organize thousands of pictures or thousands of songs in that file, then link iPhoto or iTunes to that file.
The latter is provided in iPhoto. It's in the Preferences, so it's not a case of 'it can't be done otherwise' but a case of 'We are Apple so we do it this way. Deal with it.'
Comments
At least add some indicator of progress!
Originally posted by akheron01
to them the filesharing speed is just intolerable. Beachball... beachball... beachball...
If your users are getting beach-balls all the time, something is wrong. I use SMB all the time, and I only get beach-balls when first mounting a share (doesn't last long), and if the network connection is interrupted (e.g. network cable pulled out, Airport dropout). I'm not trying to excuse this behaviour, if the Finder were threaded properly you shouldn't see beach-balls ever. But once the share is mounted, I get perfectly respectable performance.
edit: Just realised you didn't actually specifically mention SMB. For the record, I get perfectly respectable Apple File Sharing performance as well. I'm running 10.3.9 on a 500 MHz Titanium PB with 768 MB RAM.
Originally posted by akheron01
What sort of network are you using? This is all wireless and not every user has a perfectly optimal signal so that's the biggest bottleneck, but it's horrible opening a folder with many files in it over AFP.
I mostly use ethernet, but sometimes I use 802.11b airport. Of course things are worse when I use airport.
Are you using 802.11g? There is no way to get around the fact that when you open a folder, the server must send the client a list of all the files in the folder. If you have flaky airport reception, that will inevitably take a while. As you say, it would be nice if there were a progress indicator. Additionally, the Finder should be threaded better so you could at least do something else in the Finder whilst it is waiting for the file list to arrive.
Originally posted by 1337_5L4Xx0R
How about a plugin architecture for the new, leaner, meaner heavily threaded Finder? That way programmers can compensate for Apple's shortcomings wrt FTFF. The finder could be the next killer app, instead of a crusty bag of crap.
Yes, I think the same thing about a lot of programs. I reckon that's what makes most of the high-end apps like Photoshop, Maya etc so good. It's not what they can do but what they allow you to do.
Originally posted by 1337_5L4Xx0R
Marvin, Finder's FTP is a joke.
Hehe, just making sure you knew it was there. I thought maybe you were using Panther. I don't think the ftp volume mounting was in 10.3. But yeah, it is a joke. I'm on 4MB wired broadband and I tried to connect to my ftp server. It browsed through the directories very slowly and then I tried opening a file on it and it beachballed for about 10 seconds and then the ftp server disconnected.
Originally posted by Mr.H
What sort of network are you using? This is all wireless and not every user has a perfectly optimal signal so that's the biggest bottleneck, but it's horrible opening a folder with many files in it over AFP.
I think the wireless network could well be part of the issue. I tried to hook up a quad G5 with a powerbook over a wireless network so I could work on one and keep the files up to date on the other but it went so slowly that I just went back to using an ethernet cable.
It's just a question of whether it is Apple's filesharing that is bad over wireless or if it's just that the wireless network is bad.
Originally posted by ryaxnb
in my opinion the finder works fine
Did you read this thread?
How can you say that in the face of plenty of examples to the contrary?
I'm not saying that the Finder doesn't work ok for you, but you have to realise that a lot of Mac users think it sucks (for good reason). It therefore needs fixing.
The 100 AI posters and 100+ Ars posters are the people tech companies should listen to if they want an edge.
I don't agree with this. The problem is the people on internet lists are looking at their own needs while ignoring the needs of the 99% of the world that is actually living life and not on internet lists.
A lot of the time people on these lists over think things in one sense, over simplify things in another sense, and often see past the obvious.
For example many times I've seen on these lists someone point a link to a Anandtech article that shows program A is 10% faster than program B. The conclusion everyone comes to is that program B must be utter crap if program A is 10% faster.
While the truth is that you can get the job done fine with program B only that program A is 10% faster. I've seen this with applications, hardware, everything.
Many of the people on Ars are so smart they are dumb.
AI is quite a bit better but sometimes not too far behind.
You must be joking. The finder is the manager of files. No app should ever take over that task. EVER. We are already generating confusion with apps that try to mimic the finder. I have seen more people get all confused about this:"are the songs I see in iTunes files? What happens if I delete them, are they erased?" , total nonsense because it isn't clearly defined to the user that the song you see is a link to a file and not the actual file.
Here's another nonsense: You connect a camera to your Mac, iPhoto automatically launches, creates a new folder, moves the files form the camera to that folder and places the photos in it's library, all this is done behind the scenes, the novice user has no idea the iPhoto just created folders without him knowing. Now, are the pictures he sees the files? How does he know that? And where exactly are the files at?
Anytime you hide info you get into trouble. It's just not a good solution.
Well that is the job of iPhoto and iTunes they are for managing and storing pictures and music. How could they accomplish that task if they did not store and organize these items in the same files.
I wouldn't call the file hidden. Clearly in the tool bar are files called Movies, Music, Pictures. Clearly marked in those files are iPhoto pictures and iTunes music.
I don't see the problem being in the implementation. People just need to know how the system works. When iPhoto imports your pictures it places them in a file called Pictures.
Consistent storage for iPhoto is important because it nondestructively edits pictures. iPhoto needs to know where the original unaltered picture is for this to work.
Doing away with the way Apple currently does this leaves the job to the average user to set up a file, organize thousands of pictures or thousands of songs in that file, then link iPhoto or iTunes to that file.
Of course there is the option in iTunes to store your music whereever you choose.
Originally posted by Mr. H
Did you read this thread?
How can you say that in the face of plenty of examples to the contrary?
I'm not saying that the Finder doesn't work ok for you, but you have to realise that a lot of Mac users think it sucks (for good reason). It therefore needs fixing.
OK... I'll agree to that.
But how are we going to fix it?? Everyone has different ideas and what would work for them won't for others (often.) Siracusa's isn't bad, but it could use Spotlight spicing up. And I'd use his browser mode (go ahead kill me.) We'll see how it goes.
Doing away with the way Apple currently does this leaves the job to the average user to set up a file, organize thousands of pictures or thousands of songs in that file, then link iPhoto or iTunes to that file.
The latter is provided in iPhoto. It's in the Preferences, so it's not a case of 'it can't be done otherwise' but a case of 'We are Apple so we do it this way. Deal with it.'