I see what you mean by the poorly implemented folders. There's confusion.
But, and I remember Mike Matas joining Apple as UI designer (from Delicious Monster), Apple are looking to do to Finder, what it did to iTunes, iPhoto and Mail? The smart folders are already there, and Spotlight makes quick file-spotting easy.
So a browse mode - except not hierarchal - which returns files based on various properties could be a great next logical step. Or illogical, but fascinating (to some). Something like MoRu mentioned above, but integrated with OS X and Finder, and so that it's so mind-bogglingly easy and fluid. We all know Apple is capable of this
An experiment could be nice. A "throw it and, get it in a snap" thing.
"From the creators of iTunes, the iFinder*. In OS X.".
* - replace iFinder with better name. Like... iExplorer! MUAHAH!
Edit: And yep, all this has already been explored in earlier posts. It's fun to repeat good things. That way, we can have more of good things, yes?
The difficult thing here is that what is logical, is not always *best*.
If people find that it is too alien, they won't like it.
Look at our keyboards. There are much better ways of aligning the keys, we all know that. So, why hasn't any of those methods taken over?
It's because we know what we grew up with. Even if the Dvorak method is much better, it would mean that we would have to relearn something that even two finger hunt and peck typists know very well.
Now, think about replacing your entire desktop, and all of your methods of organization and retrieval. It's much too difficult to do that.
Next tried to do that with the list views. Apple had to backtrack.
I strongly believe that what needs to be done is to totally redo the underlying mechanism, while at the same time leaving the interface the same as the one people feel comfortable with.
I've already discussed this.
People don't have to feel as though they are doing something completely new. What they(we) need is continuity. Let the engine use the new metadata. Give users the options that the current system can't handle, but don't make them appear to be anything more than extensions to the way we do it now.
People need to feel as though they can just go and work without thinking that they have to learn something over again.
After a few more iterations of the OS, those small interface changes that were incorporated, will have changed things forever, but slowly enough so that people can get used to them.
Nothing is perfect, and long after all of these changes will have been incorporated, people will still be arguing about how bad they are, and what Apple has to do. Many will even mourn for the older less effective ways, just as there are still those who continue to use system 9, 8, or even 7.
People keep saying they want the next Finder revision to be like Aperture's file management system... but I don't have Aperture ( :-( ) so could anyone explain what the Aperture file system actually is?
People keep saying they want the next Finder revision to be like Aperture's file management system... but I don't have Aperture ( :-( ) so could anyone explain what the Aperture file system actually is?
I'm excited about the Aperture's data soup (par for the course now in Apple apps), its project list and metadata panels, and perhaps most of all its focus on CoreImage-savvy innovations to solve specific photographers' problems (stacks, the loupe, the lightbox).
But Aperture is actually easy compared to the Finder, because it's a specific tool with with a specific workflow solution for professionals. The real bear of a question with the Finder, which exists for everyone from newbies to creative professionals to programmers to grandmas to grizzled spatially sensitive graybeards, each with very different needs and wildly variant workflows, is what the damn problem to solve is. Which is why the OS X Finder is the pretty decent (IMO) but limited and ultimately uninspiring compromise it is today.
The key issue to me is how users access their data, and the only way to approach the differences is to have a Finder that is able to scale from novices to professionals. Easier said than done, of course, but I think the answer ultimately will be a simple UI that can be slowly unfolded, bit by bit, into a much more sophisticated one.
For me, compared to Win95 at the time, heck YEAH it was better. Lightyears ahead.
Then I got exposed to the NeXT UI, and suddenly it wasn't looking quite so efficient anymore... FWIW, I *live* in column view now, and can't imagine going back to OS9's Finder.
Others, such as John Siracusa over at ArsTechnica, still long for the Good Old Days, with some good reasons. (I don't *agree*, but they're still valid reasons.)
For me, compared to Win95 at the time, heck YEAH it was better. Lightyears ahead.
Then I got exposed to the NeXT UI, and suddenly it wasn't looking quite so efficient anymore... FWIW, I *live* in column view now, and can't imagine going back to OS9's Finder.
Others, such as John Siracusa over at ArsTechnica, still long for the Good Old Days, with some good reasons. (I don't *agree*, but they're still valid reasons.)
Kickaha, I don't know what you do for a living, so I can't accurately comment on why you find column view to be so superior. But, I know that many programmers, and other data intensive types seem to prefer that.
But, even though I find column view to be very helpful, I wouldn't want to live in it. Spacial views are far more natural for most people. That's why Apple was forced to go back to making it the main view.
Well, they made the icon view the norm, but it's still not a spatial Finder... not until you get exactly one Finder window per folder, and it always opens in the same place always.
And the thing I like about column view is that it shows breadth and depth simultaneously which is quick to navigate. A drag and drop can be retargeted really smoothly all within one window.
Well, they made the icon view the norm, but it's still not a spatial Finder... not until you get exactly one Finder window per folder, and it always opens in the same place always.
And the thing I like about column view is that it shows breadth and depth simultaneously which is quick to navigate. A drag and drop can be retargeted really smoothly all within one window.
I just noticed that I have a goof in the second sentence. It has been corrected to read: "I know that many programmers," rather than I don know that many programmers,
So, the comment was that those types do like column view. Sorry.
Yes, that was like System 9 and earlier. But it acts much more like a spacial finder than column view does. I prefer the way it works now. Once you get used to the idea that you can open a window several times, it seems natural. It only took a few times doing it by mistake to realise that. Moving things around is much easier this way.
I don't always like the way columns collapse when you move back a column. It makes moving things up the hierarchy annoying. I put folders in the sidebar to get around that.
Comments
But, and I remember Mike Matas joining Apple as UI designer (from Delicious Monster), Apple are looking to do to Finder, what it did to iTunes, iPhoto and Mail? The smart folders are already there, and Spotlight makes quick file-spotting easy.
So a browse mode - except not hierarchal - which returns files based on various properties could be a great next logical step. Or illogical, but fascinating (to some). Something like MoRu mentioned above, but integrated with OS X and Finder, and so that it's so mind-bogglingly easy and fluid. We all know Apple is capable of this
An experiment could be nice. A "throw it and, get it in a snap" thing.
"From the creators of iTunes, the iFinder*. In OS X.".
* - replace iFinder with better name. Like... iExplorer! MUAHAH!
Edit: And yep, all this has already been explored in earlier posts. It's fun to repeat good things. That way, we can have more of good things, yes?
"From the creators of iTunes, the iFinder*. In OS X.".
* - replace iFinder with better name. Like...
[/B]
Aloha?
If people find that it is too alien, they won't like it.
Look at our keyboards. There are much better ways of aligning the keys, we all know that. So, why hasn't any of those methods taken over?
It's because we know what we grew up with. Even if the Dvorak method is much better, it would mean that we would have to relearn something that even two finger hunt and peck typists know very well.
Now, think about replacing your entire desktop, and all of your methods of organization and retrieval. It's much too difficult to do that.
Next tried to do that with the list views. Apple had to backtrack.
I strongly believe that what needs to be done is to totally redo the underlying mechanism, while at the same time leaving the interface the same as the one people feel comfortable with.
I've already discussed this.
People don't have to feel as though they are doing something completely new. What they(we) need is continuity. Let the engine use the new metadata. Give users the options that the current system can't handle, but don't make them appear to be anything more than extensions to the way we do it now.
People need to feel as though they can just go and work without thinking that they have to learn something over again.
After a few more iterations of the OS, those small interface changes that were incorporated, will have changed things forever, but slowly enough so that people can get used to them.
Nothing is perfect, and long after all of these changes will have been incorporated, people will still be arguing about how bad they are, and what Apple has to do. Many will even mourn for the older less effective ways, just as there are still those who continue to use system 9, 8, or even 7.
Originally posted by melgross
Look at our keyboards. There are much better ways of aligning the keys, we all know that. So, why hasn't any of those methods taken over?
Don't look at me, I use Dvorak!
Glorifying these ideas
Thanks!
Originally posted by the_fish_v2
People keep saying they want the next Finder revision to be like Aperture's file management system... but I don't have Aperture ( :-( ) so could anyone explain what the Aperture file system actually is?
Basically, we just want it to look this sexy.
I'm excited about the Aperture's data soup (par for the course now in Apple apps), its project list and metadata panels, and perhaps most of all its focus on CoreImage-savvy innovations to solve specific photographers' problems (stacks, the loupe, the lightbox).
But Aperture is actually easy compared to the Finder, because it's a specific tool with with a specific workflow solution for professionals. The real bear of a question with the Finder, which exists for everyone from newbies to creative professionals to programmers to grandmas to grizzled spatially sensitive graybeards, each with very different needs and wildly variant workflows, is what the damn problem to solve is. Which is why the OS X Finder is the pretty decent (IMO) but limited and ultimately uninspiring compromise it is today.
The key issue to me is how users access their data, and the only way to approach the differences is to have a Finder that is able to scale from novices to professionals. Easier said than done, of course, but I think the answer ultimately will be a simple UI that can be slowly unfolded, bit by bit, into a much more sophisticated one.
Was the OS 9 Finder good? (I don't know what it was like... I used System 7 when I was an ickle kid but...)
For me, compared to Win95 at the time, heck YEAH it was better. Lightyears ahead.
Then I got exposed to the NeXT UI, and suddenly it wasn't looking quite so efficient anymore... FWIW, I *live* in column view now, and can't imagine going back to OS9's Finder.
Others, such as John Siracusa over at ArsTechnica, still long for the Good Old Days, with some good reasons. (I don't *agree*, but they're still valid reasons.)
Originally posted by Kickaha
That depends on who you ask.
For me, compared to Win95 at the time, heck YEAH it was better. Lightyears ahead.
Then I got exposed to the NeXT UI, and suddenly it wasn't looking quite so efficient anymore... FWIW, I *live* in column view now, and can't imagine going back to OS9's Finder.
Others, such as John Siracusa over at ArsTechnica, still long for the Good Old Days, with some good reasons. (I don't *agree*, but they're still valid reasons.)
Kickaha, I don't know what you do for a living, so I can't accurately comment on why you find column view to be so superior. But, I know that many programmers, and other data intensive types seem to prefer that.
But, even though I find column view to be very helpful, I wouldn't want to live in it. Spacial views are far more natural for most people. That's why Apple was forced to go back to making it the main view.
And the thing I like about column view is that it shows breadth and depth simultaneously which is quick to navigate. A drag and drop can be retargeted really smoothly all within one window.
Originally posted by Kickaha
Well, they made the icon view the norm, but it's still not a spatial Finder... not until you get exactly one Finder window per folder, and it always opens in the same place always.
And the thing I like about column view is that it shows breadth and depth simultaneously which is quick to navigate. A drag and drop can be retargeted really smoothly all within one window.
I just noticed that I have a goof in the second sentence. It has been corrected to read: "I know that many programmers," rather than I don know that many programmers,
So, the comment was that those types do like column view. Sorry.
Yes, that was like System 9 and earlier. But it acts much more like a spacial finder than column view does. I prefer the way it works now. Once you get used to the idea that you can open a window several times, it seems natural. It only took a few times doing it by mistake to realise that. Moving things around is much easier this way.
I don't always like the way columns collapse when you move back a column. It makes moving things up the hierarchy annoying. I put folders in the sidebar to get around that.