With Cocoa, Apple will be able to develop faster and focus on what really counts.
Right. Makes no difference to the end-user experience. And as Apple hasn't shown a lot of interest in developing the finder, it doesn't matter how fast the 'non-existent' development is.
This Cocoa thing is a read red herring, regarding the Finder.
Well, that's obviously *your* problem. My 2.7 Dual G5 PowerMac with 8GB of RAM has *no* problem functioning the way macheads want it to function (never quit any app, ever, even if that app is a useless piece of shit that you never want to run again *cough PhotoBooth cough*).
You should get more RAM so the Finder will work the only way it should work, the non-Windows way, never quit any app, evah! Fixing the Finder is not an option when RAM is dirt-cheap, only about 600 bucks for 4GB of RAM. And yes, if you don't like it, buy a Dell!
Is this sarcasm? Maybe I should just get an AMD. Heck, I've bought several entire, fully funcionting computers for the price of that memory. I wonder where you bought it, your price seems to be above market, even for ECC.
I keep seeing FTFF but I am perplexed. What is exactly wrong?
The biggest thing I want is an option that the Finder to sort folders/directories first, files next. In any given directory, generally what I want is usually up or down a directory. There is a hack that improves this, but it doesn't work well. Sure, I could use Spotlight, but I don't think Spotlight should be the only tool for the job, sometimes there were extenuating circumstances that meant I couldn't find the file I wanted with Spotlight.
In every pane, I think Finder should offer the option to have have an ever present "double dot" (..) equivalent that is in Unix and Windows so I can go to its parent directory, provided it's not already at root. It seems the Finder team leaves this out because it was Not Invented Here.
I'm not saying that everyone should do the things the way that I am doing, I just think that the Finder and other Apple software should be more inclusive and flexible rather than just assuming that no one wants to do it some sligthly different way.
Negative. If I have a document open in say, TextEdit, and I am done with that document, I want to
1) Close that document, and
2) Open another document.
Now if the policy was that the app would quit when the last document was closed, then I have 2 choices, neither of them elegant:
1) Close the document, and have to re-launch the TextEdit app to see my next document - a pain in the ass
2) Open the next document with the old document still open, to prevent TextEdit from quitting, and THEN go to the Window menu, bring the old document to the front, and close it - another pain in the ass.
So I much prefer the Mac way - close the document you are finished with, and then choose Open and open the next document you want. NOT a pain in the ass.
I think you too are exaggerating the amount of effort.
it should get morecore image and core video integration.
How would Core Image and Core Video help? Moving files around doesn't seem to be something that can benefit greatly from those two features.
Quote:
The GUI needs to be unified accross OSX, finder, Mail, safari, ical, Quicktime, prefs, ichat, iLife, iwork, and so on.
It should be fixed. In the short term, a program called Iridium that does most of what you want. It will change every program that it can to the "Unified" theme. Don't ask me why, that is actually the name of the look.
I think you too are exaggerating the amount of effort.
How is that an exaggeration? That's step by step what you have to do.
Windows' backwards-ass method of tying programs to Windows is what causes cheap hacks like the system tray to exist, which is a big part of the reason why Windows gets so slow once you've loaded it up with programs.
The biggest thing I want is an option that the Finder to sort folders/directories first, files next. In any given directory, generally what I want is usually up or down a directory. There is a hack that improves this, but it doesn't work well. Sure, I could use Spotlight, but I don't think Spotlight should be the only tool for the job, sometimes there were extenuating circumstances that meant I couldn't find the file I wanted with Spotlight.
If you're in icon/list view, you could always sort by Kind. But that would definately be welcomed
Quote:
In every pane, I think Finder should offer the option to have have an ever present "double dot" (..) equivalent that is in Unix and Windows so I can go to its parent directory, provided it's not already at root. It seems the Finder team leaves this out because it was Not Invented Here.
I'm not saying that everyone should do the things the way that I am doing, I just think that the Finder and other Apple software should be more inclusive and flexible rather than just assuming that no one wants to do it some sligthly different way.
One thing that happens when you add lots of features is that the Finder Preferences... gets insanely crowded.
For example, I'd venture to say that you are the only person, ever, that wants that double dot option from Unix. Ever. Why should everybody have to have a checkbox that only you would want? When you add in all kinds of options that appeal to like three peope, the Preferences begin to look like something from Microsoft Word, ie, mind-numbingly confusing.
So then some poor soul, who doesn't know what ".." means, accidentally enables it to find out. Then all these ".." folders appear. In each one of his folders. But even though they're inside a folder (because .. translates terribly to a spatial filesystem), they link somewhere else. Our dear poor soul can't figure out how to disable them, because he can't find that one option among the 500 in the Finder Preferences, so he trashes it. And all the sudden his entirely computer is in the Trash.
Not to hate on your feature of choice in particular, but options like these are never a good choice because they do so little good in comparison to the damage they do. They're really best left as haxies.
Finder is bad, but it really doesn't need much to bring it up to speed. Just some threading and a visual makeover. And better Spotlight integration (Spotlight, of course, needs lots of work to bring it up to speed... but that's another story).
In every pane, I think Finder should offer the option to have have an ever present "double dot" (..) equivalent that is in Unix and Windows so I can go to its parent directory, provided it's not already at root. It seems the Finder team leaves this out because it was Not Invented Here.
command-up arrow will do the double-dot function. ("Open enclosing folder").
In every pane, I think Finder should offer the option to have have an ever present "double dot" (..) equivalent that is in Unix and Windows so I can go to its parent directory, provided it's not already at root. It seems the Finder team leaves this out because it was Not Invented Here.
Or control-click the finder toolbar, choose "Customize toolbar", and add the item "Path". Or Command-click the title od the window to jump to any underlying directory (also works in most apps).
Or control-click the finder toolbar, choose "Customize toolbar", and add the item "Path". Or Command-click the title od the window to jump to any underlying directory (also works in most apps).
That is pretty neat, where I can jump to any parent/grandparent/..../root. Thank you. One less gripe against Finder.
Something else that has bothered me is that if I am at the end of a file list in icon view, and delete or move a lot of files from the current folder, I am left with an empty view, often without a scroll bar, despite there being files in the current folder that aren't in the current view.
What I have to do is bump an arrow key for the view to properly align itself so that the remaining files are displayed. My contention is that the finder should automatically do that without user intervention. Several times, the fact that the scroll bar is missing gave me the impression that the current folder is empty.
Yes, it is easier to write that because I'm not writing an english paper.
Mind you, writers always employ great literary license when they write. So bear his remark with little weight.
Ofcourse if you google for "Finder problems" or what not you will find complaints. However you must realize people are more apt to complain then to suddenly exclaim, "The Finder is working great today! I love it!" as one doesn't say, "wow, my throat feels great today!"
The problem probably feels amplified in a place like AI where we come to nitpick about the most minor things. I bet for every person who doesnt like the finder there is 99 who work with it with no thought at all, because for them it just works.
Sure there are problems but the fact remains that 99.998% works correctly.
I couldn't have said it better.
In Addition: I give you two numbers to consider:
active AI Posters, say, about 100
active ARS Posters, say, about, 100+
active Mac OS X users, say, about billions over billions (being quiet).
Most Mac users i know are a pretty satisfied with Finder.app,
Despite all rants and rambles the Finder gives you
quite a good computer experience on a daily basis.
Of course...and you'll probably find hundreds of millions of people satisfied with Windows. Because they don't *know*.
If everyone cattered to the lowest common denominator, we'd be a deep shit right now (maybe even literally).
Here's even more to consider:
The 100 AI posters and 100+ Ars posters are the people tech companies should listen to if they want an edge.
ditto.
Here's my gripes with the Finder. I work with column view, so most of my gripes are related to that. Some have been touched on already. Someone else stated that quite a few problems are "nit-picking". There are two things to consider: sure, some, if not all, the problems are quite small, but there are a huge number of them. Add them all up, and the problem is significant. Additionally, Apple brand themselves as paying attention to the details. (Steve Jobs talks about this in nearly every interview he gives). The Finder is one glaring example of an area where Apple have not paid attention to the details.
1. Poorly threaded
2. Handles networked storage poorly.
3. Icon only display for the sidebar in the Finder:
At the moment, the separator between the sidebar and the main part of the window can be moved so that the names of the items in the sidebar are no longer displayed. However, this also means that the eject buttons that show up for removable items in the sidebar are not displayed. There should be an option in the sidebar Finder preferences to show icon only, text only or icon and text, just like there is for the toolbar. All three views should ensure that any eject buttons are visible.
4. "Open new windows in column view" Finder preference:
I am constantly wondering what the point of this preference is. I have it checked, but I can't remember the last time a new window (e.g. a newly mounted CD, Network drive or Disk Image) actually opened in column view. When the "Open new windows in column view" Finder preference is checked, a new Finder window should NEVER open in anything other than column view. It's as simple as that.
5. View options for column view in the Finder:
Why are the only view options for column view: "text size", "icon" and "preview column"? Why aren't there options for "icon size", "keep arranged by...", and "background colour" and why is there not a persistent column width for each folder? At the moment, the view options for column view seem to be global. Surely each folder can have its own individual preferences for when it is viewed in column view, just like for other views such as "list". At the very least, it would be nice to have a preference to "auto size" all column widths (i.e. set the Finder to automatically perform the task that is performed currently if a user double-clicks on the bottom of a column separator).
6. Cut and paste of files in the Finder:
At the moment, a file can be selected in the Finder, "copy" selected from the edit menu, a new location navigated to, and "paste" selected from the edit menu in order to copy a file to a new location. It should also be possible to select "cut" from the edit menu in order to move a file from one location to another, just like in Windows. (I know there are issues with this in relation to the Cut/Paste metaphor and in some people's opinion it would therefore violate consistency of interface. If this is why the feature has not yet been implemented, why not call it something other than "cut" (for example, it could be called "move"), and give it a different keyboard shortcut?)
7. The addition of a "shelf" to Finder windows would be very helpful when moving files. The shelf could be implemented as a "drawer", and the user could choose which side the drawer should open from.
Let's say I have the shelf set to open on the right. I have file "A" that I want to move from its current directory to a new one. I click and drag file "A" outside of the Finder window to the right, and the shelf drawer opens. I let go and the file is now on the shelf. Now I navigate to the new directory, drag and drop the file from the drawer, the drawer automatically closes, and the file has been moved.
8. Switching between items in the Finder sidebar using the arrow keys:
Picture the following scenario: The Finder sidebar contains hard-drives, removable devices, the network, applications, the home folder, documents, movies etc. In the Jaguar Finder, pressing the left arrow key when in the "documents" folder in column view would scroll the user back to the home folder, then "Users", then to the root level of the hard drive. However, in the Panther Finder, if "documents" is selected from the sidebar and column view is active, it is not possible to scroll up the folder hierarchy using the left arrow key. This is fair enough. It would be extremely useful however, if pressing the left arrow key in this case made the sidebar like the "active" column, so that the items in the sidebar could then be navigated using the up and down keys. So, for example if "documents" is selected in the sidebar, but I want to go to my music folder, I can press "left" to make the sidebar active, then "down" until my music folder is selected, then "right" to navigate the music folder.
9. Unzipping files stored on read-only media
If you double-click on a zip file in the Finder, the archive will be decompressed. The Finder will attempt to write the decompressed files to the same directory as the source zip file, so if the zip file happens to be in a read-only location, such as a CD-ROM, the decompress will fail. The resultant error message by the Finder is deeply unhelpful, simply stating that the archive could not be decompressed. It would be better if the Finder checked to see if the intended destination is writable, and if not, ask the user to choose a destination for the decompressed files.
10. Shift-arrow selection behaviour. Like someone else said, this is not limited to the Finder, but is worth mentioning because it is IMHO the single most annoying thing in OS X. It really pisses me off. Really.
\tUsing iTunes as an example: In an iTunes playlist, multiple tracks can be selected by clicking on a track, then holding down the shift key whilst pressing the up/down arrow keys.
\tPressing the down arrow key always extends the selection downwards, whilst pressing the up arrow key always extends the selection upwards. This means that it is impossible to contract your selection, you can only make it bigger.
\tI find this highly annoying and think that the selection process should work like selection of text in other applications such as TextEdit. This would make the interface more consistent and more intuitive. The function of the up/down arrow keys should depend on the direction in which the selection was originally extended.
\tFor example, imagine wanting to make a selection starting at a particular song and extending downwards: if you overshoot your intended selection, you should be able to contract the selection by pressing the up arrow key. Correspondingly, if your original selection was upwards, pressing the down arrow key should then contract the selection.
The finder is definitely sluggish for me. I also find it sort of generally cumbersome, but that could also be because I still have a hard time understanding and thinking OSX sometimes.
Closing the last window in an application should close that application.
eek! Hell no. The proper differentiation between windows and applications is the biggest difference between Mac OS and Windows. I'd actually go the opposite direction and say that all apps that currently quit when you close the last window (e.g. iPhoto) should be fixed so they don't.
eek! Hell no. The proper differentiation between windows and applications is the biggest difference between Mac OS and Windows. I'd actually go the opposite direction and say that all apps that currently quit when you close the last window (e.g. iPhoto) should be fixed so they don't.
Thank you pointing out this issue. That's what i keep claiming for
eek! Hell no. The proper differentiation between windows and applications is the biggest difference between Mac OS and Windows. I'd actually go the opposite direction and say that all apps that currently quit when you close the last window (e.g. iPhoto) should be fixed so they don't.
Most of the programs that do this don't really seem to have a reason to keep running, your instance, there is only one window rather than multiple like Finder, a document editor and so on. If you still want to use the program later in a session, it seems to be much quicker to hide and unhide apps than it is to close a window and re open it.
Comments
Originally posted by kim kap sol
With Cocoa, Apple will be able to develop faster and focus on what really counts.
Right. Makes no difference to the end-user experience. And as Apple hasn't shown a lot of interest in developing the finder, it doesn't matter how fast the 'non-existent' development is.
This Cocoa thing is a read red herring, regarding the Finder.
Originally posted by kcmac
Does anyone really know what he really wants?
Attention.
Originally posted by Gene Clean
Well, that's obviously *your* problem. My 2.7 Dual G5 PowerMac with 8GB of RAM has *no* problem functioning the way macheads want it to function (never quit any app, ever, even if that app is a useless piece of shit that you never want to run again *cough PhotoBooth cough*).
You should get more RAM so the Finder will work the only way it should work, the non-Windows way, never quit any app, evah! Fixing the Finder is not an option when RAM is dirt-cheap, only about 600 bucks for 4GB of RAM. And yes, if you don't like it, buy a Dell!
Is this sarcasm? Maybe I should just get an AMD. Heck, I've bought several entire, fully funcionting computers for the price of that memory. I wonder where you bought it, your price seems to be above market, even for ECC.
Originally posted by MajorMatt
I keep seeing FTFF but I am perplexed. What is exactly wrong?
The biggest thing I want is an option that the Finder to sort folders/directories first, files next. In any given directory, generally what I want is usually up or down a directory. There is a hack that improves this, but it doesn't work well. Sure, I could use Spotlight, but I don't think Spotlight should be the only tool for the job, sometimes there were extenuating circumstances that meant I couldn't find the file I wanted with Spotlight.
In every pane, I think Finder should offer the option to have have an ever present "double dot" (..) equivalent that is in Unix and Windows so I can go to its parent directory, provided it's not already at root. It seems the Finder team leaves this out because it was Not Invented Here.
I'm not saying that everyone should do the things the way that I am doing, I just think that the Finder and other Apple software should be more inclusive and flexible rather than just assuming that no one wants to do it some sligthly different way.
Originally posted by lundy
Negative. If I have a document open in say, TextEdit, and I am done with that document, I want to
1) Close that document, and
2) Open another document.
Now if the policy was that the app would quit when the last document was closed, then I have 2 choices, neither of them elegant:
1) Close the document, and have to re-launch the TextEdit app to see my next document - a pain in the ass
2) Open the next document with the old document still open, to prevent TextEdit from quitting, and THEN go to the Window menu, bring the old document to the front, and close it - another pain in the ass.
So I much prefer the Mac way - close the document you are finished with, and then choose Open and open the next document you want. NOT a pain in the ass.
I think you too are exaggerating the amount of effort.
Originally posted by a_greer
it should get morecore image and core video integration.
How would Core Image and Core Video help? Moving files around doesn't seem to be something that can benefit greatly from those two features.
The GUI needs to be unified accross OSX, finder, Mail, safari, ical, Quicktime, prefs, ichat, iLife, iwork, and so on.
It should be fixed. In the short term, a program called Iridium that does most of what you want. It will change every program that it can to the "Unified" theme. Don't ask me why, that is actually the name of the look.
Originally posted by JeffDM
I think you too are exaggerating the amount of effort.
How is that an exaggeration? That's step by step what you have to do.
Windows' backwards-ass method of tying programs to Windows is what causes cheap hacks like the system tray to exist, which is a big part of the reason why Windows gets so slow once you've loaded it up with programs.
Originally posted by JeffDM
The biggest thing I want is an option that the Finder to sort folders/directories first, files next. In any given directory, generally what I want is usually up or down a directory. There is a hack that improves this, but it doesn't work well. Sure, I could use Spotlight, but I don't think Spotlight should be the only tool for the job, sometimes there were extenuating circumstances that meant I couldn't find the file I wanted with Spotlight.
If you're in icon/list view, you could always sort by Kind. But that would definately be welcomed
In every pane, I think Finder should offer the option to have have an ever present "double dot" (..) equivalent that is in Unix and Windows so I can go to its parent directory, provided it's not already at root. It seems the Finder team leaves this out because it was Not Invented Here.
I'm not saying that everyone should do the things the way that I am doing, I just think that the Finder and other Apple software should be more inclusive and flexible rather than just assuming that no one wants to do it some sligthly different way.
One thing that happens when you add lots of features is that the Finder Preferences... gets insanely crowded.
For example, I'd venture to say that you are the only person, ever, that wants that double dot option from Unix. Ever. Why should everybody have to have a checkbox that only you would want? When you add in all kinds of options that appeal to like three peope, the Preferences begin to look like something from Microsoft Word, ie, mind-numbingly confusing.
So then some poor soul, who doesn't know what ".." means, accidentally enables it to find out. Then all these ".." folders appear. In each one of his folders. But even though they're inside a folder (because .. translates terribly to a spatial filesystem), they link somewhere else. Our dear poor soul can't figure out how to disable them, because he can't find that one option among the 500 in the Finder Preferences, so he trashes it. And all the sudden his entirely computer is in the Trash.
Not to hate on your feature of choice in particular, but options like these are never a good choice because they do so little good in comparison to the damage they do. They're really best left as haxies.
Finder is bad, but it really doesn't need much to bring it up to speed. Just some threading and a visual makeover. And better Spotlight integration (Spotlight, of course, needs lots of work to bring it up to speed... but that's another story).
Originally posted by JeffDM
In every pane, I think Finder should offer the option to have have an ever present "double dot" (..) equivalent that is in Unix and Windows so I can go to its parent directory, provided it's not already at root. It seems the Finder team leaves this out because it was Not Invented Here.
command-up arrow will do the double-dot function. ("Open enclosing folder").
Originally posted by JeffDM
In every pane, I think Finder should offer the option to have have an ever present "double dot" (..) equivalent that is in Unix and Windows so I can go to its parent directory, provided it's not already at root. It seems the Finder team leaves this out because it was Not Invented Here.
Or control-click the finder toolbar, choose "Customize toolbar", and add the item "Path". Or Command-click the title od the window to jump to any underlying directory (also works in most apps).
Originally posted by Whyatt Thrash
Or control-click the finder toolbar, choose "Customize toolbar", and add the item "Path". Or Command-click the title od the window to jump to any underlying directory (also works in most apps).
That is pretty neat, where I can jump to any parent/grandparent/..../root. Thank you. One less gripe against Finder.
Link
What I have to do is bump an arrow key for the view to properly align itself so that the remaining files are displayed. My contention is that the finder should automatically do that without user intervention. Several times, the fact that the scroll bar is missing gave me the impression that the current folder is empty.
Originally posted by MajorMatt
Yes, it is easier to write that because I'm not writing an english paper.
Mind you, writers always employ great literary license when they write. So bear his remark with little weight.
Ofcourse if you google for "Finder problems" or what not you will find complaints. However you must realize people are more apt to complain then to suddenly exclaim, "The Finder is working great today! I love it!" as one doesn't say, "wow, my throat feels great today!"
The problem probably feels amplified in a place like AI where we come to nitpick about the most minor things. I bet for every person who doesnt like the finder there is 99 who work with it with no thought at all, because for them it just works.
Sure there are problems but the fact remains that 99.998% works correctly.
I couldn't have said it better.
In Addition: I give you two numbers to consider:
active AI Posters, say, about 100
active ARS Posters, say, about, 100+
active Mac OS X users, say, about billions over billions (being quiet).
Most Mac users i know are a pretty satisfied with Finder.app,
Despite all rants and rambles the Finder gives you
quite a good computer experience on a daily basis.
Consider.
Originally posted by Vox Barbara
I couldn't have said it better.
In Addition: I give you two numbers to consider:
active AI Posters, say, about 100
active ARS Posters, say, about, 100+
active Mac OS X users, say, about billions over billions (being quiet).
Most Mac users i know are a pretty satisfied with Finder.app,
Despite all rants and rambles the Finder gives you
quite a good computer experience on a daily basis.
Consider.
Of course...and you'll probably find hundreds of millions of people satisfied with Windows. Because they don't *know*.
If everyone cattered to the lowest common denominator, we'd be a deep shit right now (maybe even literally).
Here's even more to consider:
The 100 AI posters and 100+ Ars posters are the people tech companies should listen to if they want an edge.
Originally posted by kim kap sol
Of course...and you'll probably find hundreds of millions of people satisfied with Windows. Because they don't *know*.
If everyone cattered to the lowest common denominator, we'd be a deep shit right now (maybe even literally).
Here's even more to consider:
The 100 AI posters and 100+ Ars posters are the people tech companies should listen to if they want an edge.
ditto.
Here's my gripes with the Finder. I work with column view, so most of my gripes are related to that. Some have been touched on already. Someone else stated that quite a few problems are "nit-picking". There are two things to consider: sure, some, if not all, the problems are quite small, but there are a huge number of them. Add them all up, and the problem is significant. Additionally, Apple brand themselves as paying attention to the details. (Steve Jobs talks about this in nearly every interview he gives). The Finder is one glaring example of an area where Apple have not paid attention to the details.
1. Poorly threaded
2. Handles networked storage poorly.
3. Icon only display for the sidebar in the Finder:
At the moment, the separator between the sidebar and the main part of the window can be moved so that the names of the items in the sidebar are no longer displayed. However, this also means that the eject buttons that show up for removable items in the sidebar are not displayed. There should be an option in the sidebar Finder preferences to show icon only, text only or icon and text, just like there is for the toolbar. All three views should ensure that any eject buttons are visible.
4. "Open new windows in column view" Finder preference:
I am constantly wondering what the point of this preference is. I have it checked, but I can't remember the last time a new window (e.g. a newly mounted CD, Network drive or Disk Image) actually opened in column view. When the "Open new windows in column view" Finder preference is checked, a new Finder window should NEVER open in anything other than column view. It's as simple as that.
5. View options for column view in the Finder:
Why are the only view options for column view: "text size", "icon" and "preview column"? Why aren't there options for "icon size", "keep arranged by...", and "background colour" and why is there not a persistent column width for each folder? At the moment, the view options for column view seem to be global. Surely each folder can have its own individual preferences for when it is viewed in column view, just like for other views such as "list". At the very least, it would be nice to have a preference to "auto size" all column widths (i.e. set the Finder to automatically perform the task that is performed currently if a user double-clicks on the bottom of a column separator).
6. Cut and paste of files in the Finder:
At the moment, a file can be selected in the Finder, "copy" selected from the edit menu, a new location navigated to, and "paste" selected from the edit menu in order to copy a file to a new location. It should also be possible to select "cut" from the edit menu in order to move a file from one location to another, just like in Windows. (I know there are issues with this in relation to the Cut/Paste metaphor and in some people's opinion it would therefore violate consistency of interface. If this is why the feature has not yet been implemented, why not call it something other than "cut" (for example, it could be called "move"), and give it a different keyboard shortcut?)
7. The addition of a "shelf" to Finder windows would be very helpful when moving files. The shelf could be implemented as a "drawer", and the user could choose which side the drawer should open from.
Let's say I have the shelf set to open on the right. I have file "A" that I want to move from its current directory to a new one. I click and drag file "A" outside of the Finder window to the right, and the shelf drawer opens. I let go and the file is now on the shelf. Now I navigate to the new directory, drag and drop the file from the drawer, the drawer automatically closes, and the file has been moved.
8. Switching between items in the Finder sidebar using the arrow keys:
Picture the following scenario: The Finder sidebar contains hard-drives, removable devices, the network, applications, the home folder, documents, movies etc. In the Jaguar Finder, pressing the left arrow key when in the "documents" folder in column view would scroll the user back to the home folder, then "Users", then to the root level of the hard drive. However, in the Panther Finder, if "documents" is selected from the sidebar and column view is active, it is not possible to scroll up the folder hierarchy using the left arrow key. This is fair enough. It would be extremely useful however, if pressing the left arrow key in this case made the sidebar like the "active" column, so that the items in the sidebar could then be navigated using the up and down keys. So, for example if "documents" is selected in the sidebar, but I want to go to my music folder, I can press "left" to make the sidebar active, then "down" until my music folder is selected, then "right" to navigate the music folder.
9. Unzipping files stored on read-only media
If you double-click on a zip file in the Finder, the archive will be decompressed. The Finder will attempt to write the decompressed files to the same directory as the source zip file, so if the zip file happens to be in a read-only location, such as a CD-ROM, the decompress will fail. The resultant error message by the Finder is deeply unhelpful, simply stating that the archive could not be decompressed. It would be better if the Finder checked to see if the intended destination is writable, and if not, ask the user to choose a destination for the decompressed files.
10. Shift-arrow selection behaviour. Like someone else said, this is not limited to the Finder, but is worth mentioning because it is IMHO the single most annoying thing in OS X. It really pisses me off. Really.
\tUsing iTunes as an example: In an iTunes playlist, multiple tracks can be selected by clicking on a track, then holding down the shift key whilst pressing the up/down arrow keys.
\tPressing the down arrow key always extends the selection downwards, whilst pressing the up arrow key always extends the selection upwards. This means that it is impossible to contract your selection, you can only make it bigger.
\tI find this highly annoying and think that the selection process should work like selection of text in other applications such as TextEdit. This would make the interface more consistent and more intuitive. The function of the up/down arrow keys should depend on the direction in which the selection was originally extended.
\tFor example, imagine wanting to make a selection starting at a particular song and extending downwards: if you overshoot your intended selection, you should be able to contract the selection by pressing the up arrow key. Correspondingly, if your original selection was upwards, pressing the down arrow key should then contract the selection.
Originally posted by BenRoethig
Closing the last window in an application should close that application.
eek! Hell no. The proper differentiation between windows and applications is the biggest difference between Mac OS and Windows. I'd actually go the opposite direction and say that all apps that currently quit when you close the last window (e.g. iPhoto) should be fixed so they don't.
Originally posted by Mr. H
eek! Hell no. The proper differentiation between windows and applications is the biggest difference between Mac OS and Windows. I'd actually go the opposite direction and say that all apps that currently quit when you close the last window (e.g. iPhoto) should be fixed so they don't.
Thank you pointing out this issue. That's what i keep claiming for
years. Apple didn't listen to me.
Originally posted by Mr. H
eek! Hell no. The proper differentiation between windows and applications is the biggest difference between Mac OS and Windows. I'd actually go the opposite direction and say that all apps that currently quit when you close the last window (e.g. iPhoto) should be fixed so they don't.
Most of the programs that do this don't really seem to have a reason to keep running, your instance, there is only one window rather than multiple like Finder, a document editor and so on. If you still want to use the program later in a session, it seems to be much quicker to hide and unhide apps than it is to close a window and re open it.