Linked by Thom Holwerda on Tue 21st Dec 2010 00:09 UTC
Mac OS X It's a public secret that there are many people with complaints about Mac OS X's Finder. It lacks several features common to other file managers, and on top of that, it has several issues with dealing with some types of network shares (SAMBA, specifically). While third parties can't fix the bugs, they can extend the Finder's feature set. TotalFinder is a collection of Finder extensions that tries to bring some of Google Chrome's interface ideas to the Finder. BinaryAge was kind enough to provide me with a free license so I could give a quick review of TotalFinder.
Thread beginning with comment 454301
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Open Source
by macinnisrr on Tue 21st Dec 2010 11:41 UTC
Member since:

Since I've been using linux as my daily desktop (about 5 years), I've used Konqueror, Dolphin, Nautilus and Thunar. All of these support not only all the features listed here, but also all the features (like drag/drop) you'll find in Finder or Explorer. Now, while I realize most people will never use all these features, why would anyone think it's a good thing to exclude them, especially when they're presumably so easy to implement? Of course everyone has their own way of working, but I firmly believe the best option is to support them all, first of all so that nobody has to learn a new way of doing things when switching systems, and second so that users can learn a new and potentially faster way of doing things if they so desire. Kudos to the developers of this software. Now if only Apple/Microsoft will take a hint...

Reply Score: 2

RE: Open Source
by henderson101 on Tue 21st Dec 2010 12:13 in reply to "Open Source"
henderson101 Member since:

why would anyone think it's a good thing to exclude them, especially when they're presumably so easy to implement?

Why do you assume that these features are necessary to function? That is the fundamental issue here. It's not that party A is lacking the features of party B. Not at all. It's all about finding analogues to specific functionality (aka. metaphorical "crutches") that a specific individual believes they can not live without. It's an eternal struggle that humanity seems to need to re-enact on multiple levels and through multiple subject matters, metaphors, paradigms and ideologies.

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[2]: Open Source
by Thom_Holwerda on Tue 21st Dec 2010 12:20 in reply to "RE: Open Source"
Thom_Holwerda Member since:

Blah blah blah excuses blah bah excuses blah blah.

Now go read Siracusa's countless Mac OS X reviews and his other articles on the Finder, and you'll see that even the greatest Mac OS X expert outside of Cupertino believes the Finder is a total turd that needs some serious work. I believe it was him, even, who coined the acronym "FTFF".

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[2]: Open Source
by macinnisrr on Tue 21st Dec 2010 23:16 in reply to "RE: Open Source"
macinnisrr Member since:

I'm not saying Finder's not just fine if that's what you learn on, all you have, or even compared to other file managers (once you get used to the paradigms you mentioned). I often use drag 'n' drop for cut/paste. But sometimes I use the keyboard shortcuts for cut/paste. Depends what I'm working on.

The thing that I've found really disappointing (and what I originally intended to say; I was pretty sleepy still while writing this) is that the first systems I used were Windows. When I got an ibook a few years back, I had to learn a new way of doing file management. However, when I switched to linux for daily work, both skillsets applied. Not only that, but I found newer, more efficient (for me at least, I realize it's all subjective) ways of doing certain things.

Luckily, I've been able to abandon Windows, and yet sometimes when I'm fixing a friends PC or using a virtual machine (a couple times a year, probably less than 5), I am slowed down a lot, as I have to then remember what the Explorer way of doing things is. And when I use that old ibook (which is just as rarely, but some of the software I use only runs on OSX), I have to remember the Finder way of doing things, which is a separate skillset, although many features overlap.

The point is, though, that when I use either of these file managers, I can go back to any of my linux boxes and use both skillsets and more without any thinking at all. Obviously my preference is linux and not everyone shares that point of view, but as I mentioned, since it's apparently so easy to implement all of these features (if a bunch of open source, non-commercial projects can achieve this, I'll just go ahead and assume that the massive corporate entities of the major players can), why wouldn't you?

There are many areas in which open source software is lagging behind proprietary offerings (I dare say most), why is file management (as an aside, process management as well) - a rudimentary part of any OS - the exception?

P.S. this is "OSNews": why are "linux", "OSX" and even "OSNews" not in the spellcheck dictionary?

Reply Parent Score: 1