Groverat, I don't think many will agree with you concerning multiuser issues. The system makes sense even if you share one account, because it abstracts the user from the OS components. If you don't want to use multiple accounts, then just use one. That's pretty simple. If all you want is each user to have a different desktop picture, write a script or an applet that automates the switching process. If you want anything more than that, you're going to have to create true multiple accounts. If you want to share documents between accounts, manipulate the permissions accordingly. It's not that difficult. Multi-user will be far better in Panther since it won't require a log-out to switch users.
Multiple Library folders exist because certain files are installed system wide (System Library), for every user (Root Library) and on an individual basis (User Library). Apple could help out the user by simplifying the Library folder structure and by naming each a specific name rather than simply "Library." (The standard folders contained in the Libraries should receive custom icons, and they should be better organized in subfolders.) But the concept itself makes sense. I know you're probably playing devil's advocate here a bit, groverat, but you make things sound worse than they really are.
I don't know if he's playing devil's advocate, but I'm not. I think the multiple users aspect of the current OS X is a disaster. Write an applet? Manipulate permissions? People who just "use" the computer, like my wife who's been using a Mac for 15 years, are lost in the X directory structure. I know I still lose my place in the multiple "Documents" and "Applications" and "Library" directories. Yeah, you could just say everyone who has trouble is stupid, but that's hardly an appropriate philosophy behind interface design and usability.
I bet multiple users is nice for some folks, but I'd guess that very few Mac users really need it. I understand that it's part of Unix, and so it's just there whether you want it or not. But I think it's a very good thing that they're focusing on hiding it in Panther.
Well, I think anyone who says that the current/previous Finder UI with regard to users was fine has low expectations. I think the unix system is a good thing, its main drawback is some of the cryptic users and groups it uses, something that I think frustrates a lot of Mac users right now. Stuff like the "wheel" group and "nobody" user. I've never liked that anyone right now can see those basically untouchable (or rather bad-to-tamper-with) users and groups, as much as I don't like that anyone can see the System folder but can't do anything with it. That must be frustrating to a lot of people. I realize it was only done so OS 9 upgraders and those using Classic could make some sense of the system, but I'm glad it's effectively gone in Panther.
I think that saying the permissions system is inferior is a slight case of, forgive the cliché, throwing the baby out with the bath water. OS 9 was secure by default -- it simply didn't have the networking power to make it insecure. OS X is inherently more secure with this system, and it potentially makes a compromised system more easily recovered. Also, it's true that stuff in OS x isn't as easily shared as the cummunal Classic system data. But IMO, that's something that can be improved quite a bit, just by making the handling of permissions easier for the user -- providing means for a user to make some stuff available to a group that much easier. To me, it's the UI that's the weak point in all these cases, not the architecture. The Panther Finder has improved some of these things immensely. I think the rest will come with iApp and third party impetus as well as any Finder revisions.
THis is actualy a WONDERFUL feature of Mac OS X. Why? Simple. Want to upgrade to a new computer- just move the home directory. Want to do a clean install? Just backup the home directory (or use Archive and Clean install). Backup? Just the home directory.
What I think Apple should do is provide an option to HIDE all root directories except for Applications. Then create a VIRTUAL shortcut on the root to the currently logged in home directory. That way a user only sees two directories - Me and Applications.
It's :snif: :snif: so, so, beautiful.
Such a great idea... and then provide the option for the UNIX geeks to display something other than this. How many times does a basic user need to get into the System folder.. 0. How about the system Library? Tampoco.
And with OS 9 going farther and farther out of sight, I think that this would be a great idea.
Exactly. Isolating your stuff from the System is a Good Thing.? The tediousness of clicking around indeed should be hidden from users, as well as System and Library. Since we aren't allowed to touch things in there and need to sudo rm them anyway why can we see them? Our hard drive should just show Home and Apps.
OS 9 Labels!? Well backwards compatibility is nice but they should add rich metadata. VFS plugins are getting the boot? Hmm maybe in 10.4 we'll see a new filesystem.\
However there should be a way to show invisible folders for power users, like I hate to say it...but in Windoze in Folder Options "Show Invisible Folders." No kidding, it sorely needs to be in OS X and I would like it. Plus Windows users would like it. So how about it Apple?
The "user" folder should only be created if there are multiple accounts. I have one account on this computer but I still have to go through users with different Library folders (whatever the hell THOSE are).
There should be no such thing as "User" folder. I'm not a user I want my folder up there on top. If I share this comp with others, ok fine make a folder for each at the top as well. Why do my files, the ones I use and care about need be stuck somewhere in the corner?
Oh... and, my comp has more libraries than the state of California and more preferences than a confused bimbo.
The new finder seems to work better, I'll have to use first to see, but the real problem is the mess Apple's created with the file system. I would rather see a simplification of the system files and placing the, er...hummm, "user(s)" folder(s) at the top.
That just plain sucks. So the OS hijacks the contents of HD and only shows me what someone at Apple thinks I should see? How wonderful. NOT! That's going in the wrong direction. If you want to lose the ability to control something, hide it. There you go. Bam. Go hire some expert to fix it when it breaks.
Except... note that at any time you can click on the drive icon top left, and go *PRECISELY* where you want, *ANYWHERE* on the drive.
Nothing is hidden from you. Sheesh, mon.
Allrighty then... what we have here is a "Finder", ya know, some window now called the finder showing you the stuff you need most and not a window showing the contents of the HD. Ya now, kinda like a cross between a browser and a window but not really.
I keep forgetting we no longer have windows we now have finders.
I'm joking mostly. It's all good and coming together just fine.
hey, we need an 'Angry 14 year old' stamp to throw on posts around here...
it'd work at MacNN, too... just today someone wrote that, because apple introduced more elements into the 10.3 extras.rsrc (a second, dimmed gradient title bar for when a palette was open above the currently active window, specifically) that 'hordes of torch-wielding users will be begging for themes.'
i kid you not.
back to your regularly scheduled intellectual debate. kickaha; may want to PM mr. siracusa a link to this topic. i've seen him around here in the past few days.
I like the Jag finder..but I am curious about the new one. At first blush, I was horrified. I was very apprehensive about it. I still have not used the new finder - so only time will tell. I thought about it for a good long while..scoured the web (and here) seeing many screen shots - I am actually starting to look forward to using the new finder. Curiosity killed the cat...so let's see if it kills me too.
*Sigh...* I really, really hope Apple does the following steps until Panther's released:
1.) Strip that Brushed Metal - or make it a user's choice.
2.) Let the user decide whether to use the Kiddy Finder? or the 'real' one.
3.) Give the Labels feature a _bit_ more subtle colours.
User centric? Yes, but what about the power users that have actually come to like column view the way it worked in Jaguar? There's also ALREADY a place for shortcuts: The toolbar! Can I *PLEEEASE* choose which of those I want to use? Well, I can, but the Finder forgets about it, as a newly opened window either has both or none. Sure, a bug, right? I hope so, but the concept seems to be to make the Finder kiddy-proof. Stupid, Steve.
1. I think the whole idea about 'New Window' in Finder is somewhat inconsistent. For most of us Finder is the only app to browse a file system. We operate mostly such notions as open this file and open that folder. Anyone knows what happens when (s)he double-clicks an item in Finder. What are windows in this paradigm? For most users a window is a folder, a WYSIWYG representation of its contents. Mac OS X Finder, however, is closer to treating a window like a Mach port to a file system structure, a peephole through which you look at your files. Like open another peephole. I may be wrong, but Mac OS X Finder feels so. I have no problems with either approach, but find the pre-Mac OS X one more intuitive.
2. Files/folders at the root of your hard drive being unavailable/unmodifiable/undeletable feel like someone has hi-jacked your computer. I heard 'WTF! How's that I don't have enough permissions on my own computer? What does access denied mean? It's mine after all' dozens of times; and it no longer sounds ridiculous to me. It's frightening.
A user should decide for himself whether he/she needs the gory truth about hidden 2 GB of files. Believe me, if I click 'Yes, I am ready to see it' button, I know what I am doing. If my wife never even finds the button, she doesn't need it like she doesn't need to know about root and /System ? she has other things to do. Now she asks me if she can move those damn folders somewhere else and I have to say, 'Darling, you do not have enough access privileges'. She asks if I can do that for her. I say, 'I don't either'. And this dialog is really ridiculous.
costique, I imagine you don't work in tech support. If you do, you must be a sadomasochist. [EDIT=When I wrote this, I forgot that every tech-support person is, by definition, into S&M. So I'm guessing costique does work it tech support, and actually wants to deal with the millions of users who would inevitably f*** up their installation of X upon being given root user priviliges]
The dialog boxes could be more friendly. For example: "You cannot copy a file into another user's "Documents" folder. To share a file with other users, copy it to the "Shared" folder, or that user's "Drop Box" (in their "Public") folder." However, giving all users root privilages would be BAD. Nothing good would ever come of that. If the user knows enough to independantly gain root privilages, then that's their perogative.
You still get the idiot who knows nothing about Unix/Mac OS X but gives himself (notice the masculine) r00t privilages (notice the l33tism) and f***s up the system. Those kind of people "know just enough to be dangerous". However, having the root user disabled (and not easily enabled by n00bs) by default is A Good Thing.
Comments
Originally posted by Big Mac
Groverat, I don't think many will agree with you concerning multiuser issues. The system makes sense even if you share one account, because it abstracts the user from the OS components. If you don't want to use multiple accounts, then just use one. That's pretty simple. If all you want is each user to have a different desktop picture, write a script or an applet that automates the switching process. If you want anything more than that, you're going to have to create true multiple accounts. If you want to share documents between accounts, manipulate the permissions accordingly. It's not that difficult. Multi-user will be far better in Panther since it won't require a log-out to switch users.
Multiple Library folders exist because certain files are installed system wide (System Library), for every user (Root Library) and on an individual basis (User Library). Apple could help out the user by simplifying the Library folder structure and by naming each a specific name rather than simply "Library." (The standard folders contained in the Libraries should receive custom icons, and they should be better organized in subfolders.) But the concept itself makes sense. I know you're probably playing devil's advocate here a bit, groverat, but you make things sound worse than they really are.
I don't know if he's playing devil's advocate, but I'm not. I think the multiple users aspect of the current OS X is a disaster. Write an applet? Manipulate permissions? People who just "use" the computer, like my wife who's been using a Mac for 15 years, are lost in the X directory structure. I know I still lose my place in the multiple "Documents" and "Applications" and "Library" directories. Yeah, you could just say everyone who has trouble is stupid, but that's hardly an appropriate philosophy behind interface design and usability.
I bet multiple users is nice for some folks, but I'd guess that very few Mac users really need it. I understand that it's part of Unix, and so it's just there whether you want it or not. But I think it's a very good thing that they're focusing on hiding it in Panther.
I think that saying the permissions system is inferior is a slight case of, forgive the cliché, throwing the baby out with the bath water. OS 9 was secure by default -- it simply didn't have the networking power to make it insecure. OS X is inherently more secure with this system, and it potentially makes a compromised system more easily recovered. Also, it's true that stuff in OS x isn't as easily shared as the cummunal Classic system data. But IMO, that's something that can be improved quite a bit, just by making the handling of permissions easier for the user -- providing means for a user to make some stuff available to a group that much easier. To me, it's the UI that's the weak point in all these cases, not the architecture. The Panther Finder has improved some of these things immensely. I think the rest will come with iApp and third party impetus as well as any Finder revisions.
Originally posted by alex_kac
THis is actualy a WONDERFUL feature of Mac OS X. Why? Simple. Want to upgrade to a new computer- just move the home directory. Want to do a clean install? Just backup the home directory (or use Archive and Clean install). Backup? Just the home directory.
What I think Apple should do is provide an option to HIDE all root directories except for Applications. Then create a VIRTUAL shortcut on the root to the currently logged in home directory. That way a user only sees two directories - Me and Applications.
It's :snif: :snif: so, so, beautiful.
Such a great idea... and then provide the option for the UNIX geeks to display something other than this. How many times does a basic user need to get into the System folder.. 0. How about the system Library? Tampoco.
And with OS 9 going farther and farther out of sight, I think that this would be a great idea.
OS 9 Labels!? Well backwards compatibility is nice but they should add rich metadata. VFS plugins are getting the boot? Hmm maybe in 10.4 we'll see a new filesystem.
However there should be a way to show invisible folders for power users, like I hate to say it...but in Windoze in Folder Options "Show Invisible Folders." No kidding, it sorely needs to be in OS X and I would like it. Plus Windows users would like it. So how about it Apple?
Originally posted by groverat
The "user" folder should only be created if there are multiple accounts. I have one account on this computer but I still have to go through users with different Library folders (whatever the hell THOSE are).
There should be no such thing as "User" folder. I'm not a user
Oh... and, my comp has more libraries than the state of California and more preferences than a confused bimbo.
The new finder seems to work better, I'll have to use first to see, but the real problem is the mess Apple's created with the file system. I would rather see a simplification of the system files and placing the, er...hummm, "user(s)" folder(s) at the top.
Originally posted by Brad
?? Move the scroll bar to the left.
What left?
http://forums.appleinsider.com/image...r/finder16.png
Click it and explain please.
That just plain sucks. So the OS hijacks the contents of HD and only shows me what someone at Apple thinks I should see? How wonderful.
I hope this is not the case, I really hope.
Except... note that at any time you can click on the drive icon top left, and go *PRECISELY* where you want, *ANYWHERE* on the drive.
Nothing is hidden from you. Sheesh, mon.
Originally posted by Kickaha
Except... note that at any time you can click on the drive icon top left, and go *PRECISELY* where you want, *ANYWHERE* on the drive.
Nothing is hidden from you. Sheesh, mon.
Allrighty then... what we have here is a "Finder", ya know, some window now called the finder showing you the stuff you need most and not a window showing the contents of the HD.
I keep forgetting we no longer have windows we now have finders.
I'm joking mostly. It's all good and coming together just fine.
it'd work at MacNN, too... just today someone wrote that, because apple introduced more elements into the 10.3 extras.rsrc (a second, dimmed gradient title bar for when a palette was open above the currently active window, specifically) that 'hordes of torch-wielding users will be begging for themes.'
i kid you not.
back to your regularly scheduled intellectual debate. kickaha; may want to PM mr. siracusa a link to this topic. i've seen him around here in the past few days.
-tommy
Barto
you should be able to add aliases views etc to the
left hand side
the treeview still sucks compared to windows
theres a lot of room for improvement in this area
hopefully apple will look into this & take the best
of what other os's have to offer in terms of navigation
& implement something good
Originally posted by Brad
?? Move the scroll bar to the left.
What left?
http://forums.appleinsider.com/image...r/finder16.png
Click it and explain please.
Open a new Finder window that's set to open in Home.
1.) Strip that Brushed Metal - or make it a user's choice.
2.) Let the user decide whether to use the Kiddy Finder? or the 'real' one.
3.) Give the Labels feature a _bit_ more subtle colours.
User centric? Yes, but what about the power users that have actually come to like column view the way it worked in Jaguar? There's also ALREADY a place for shortcuts: The toolbar! Can I *PLEEEASE* choose which of those I want to use? Well, I can, but the Finder forgets about it, as a newly opened window either has both or none. Sure, a bug, right? I hope so, but the concept seems to be to make the Finder kiddy-proof. Stupid, Steve.
2. Files/folders at the root of your hard drive being unavailable/unmodifiable/undeletable feel like someone has hi-jacked your computer. I heard 'WTF! How's that I don't have enough permissions on my own computer? What does access denied mean? It's mine after all' dozens of times; and it no longer sounds ridiculous to me. It's frightening.
A user should decide for himself whether he/she needs the gory truth about hidden 2 GB of files. Believe me, if I click 'Yes, I am ready to see it' button, I know what I am doing. If my wife never even finds the button, she doesn't need it like she doesn't need to know about root and /System ? she has other things to do. Now she asks me if she can move those damn folders somewhere else and I have to say, 'Darling, you do not have enough access privileges'. She asks if I can do that for her. I say, 'I don't either'. And this dialog is really ridiculous.
The dialog boxes could be more friendly. For example: "You cannot copy a file into another user's "Documents" folder. To share a file with other users, copy it to the "Shared" folder, or that user's "Drop Box" (in their "Public") folder." However, giving all users root privilages would be BAD. Nothing good would ever come of that. If the user knows enough to independantly gain root privilages, then that's their perogative.
You still get the idiot who knows nothing about Unix/Mac OS X but gives himself (notice the masculine) r00t privilages (notice the l33tism) and f***s up the system. Those kind of people "know just enough to be dangerous". However, having the root user disabled (and not easily enabled by n00bs) by default is A Good Thing.
Anyway... PHOTO-CHOP!
Barto
Originally posted by Barto
costique, I imagine you don't work in tech support. If you do, you must be a sadomasochist.