To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
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".
??? What excuses? That I'm happy with what I have? If that is an excuse to you, I proclaim you a "Foeboy".
If you want me to read these reviews, provide some links.
Little Thommy, you are entitled to your opinion, but in the grown up world you must realise that things are not always cut and dry. You hate Finder; that is *your* opinion - others might feel differently. One man's "turd" is another man's treasure. *shrugs*
Funny enough, I can't remember that Siracusa criticized those things you claim to be so important ..
Siracusa's main critics are about the loss of old Mac OS Finder behaviour like spacial finder or file metadata. NOT about tabs or other gimmicks that TotalFinder introduces.
Nice if TotalFinder helps some people being more productive with the Mac. But that does not mean Finder is broken, just different.
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?





Member since:
2006-05-30
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.