Home > macOS > Mac OS X 10.3: Panther Uncaged Mac OS X 10.3: Panther Uncaged Eugenia Loli 2004-01-20 macOS 64 Comments This major revamp of Mac OS X swaps eye-candy for speed and a compelling feature-set, says APCMag in their review. About The Author Eugenia Loli Ex-programmer, ex-editor in chief at OSNews.com, now a visual artist/filmmaker. Follow me on Twitter @EugeniaLoli 64 Comments 2004-01-20 2:37 am Anonymous Forget remote desktop; If you’ve got broadband, use tightvnc; Less efficient but works and is free. 2004-01-20 2:52 am Anonymous Uh, Panther is $129 everywhere I see it fro sale. Not $229 2004-01-20 2:58 am Anonymous “astonishing increase of 43% in overall XBench scores, with a 73% lift in user interface speed” It’s nice to see actual stats rather than just “feels faster”. “Feels faster” is about as useful as the duration of time some people refer to as a “moment”. 2004-01-20 2:58 am Anonymous That’s australlian dollars, not USD. 2004-01-20 2:59 am Anonymous er, that is an Australian site. They are quoting Australian dollars. 2004-01-20 3:00 am Anonymous For me, the biggest disapointment in OS X is the finder. The worst part is that there is no url type bar like in Explorer/Nautilus/Konqueror. There is no UP button! This drives me insane. It feels like some one has tied my hands behind my back. Here is an example of why this is bad not to show where your are in a URL type bar. I have 2 open finder windows. They are in different directories but are both named “images”. Looking at the finder windows on my screen I have no way to know what one is what. I don’t know just by looking at the window if the one on the left is the one that i’m moving files TO or FROM. This isn’t a huge deal until you have 8 finder windows open and you’re organizing files, get up and leave, come back and you have no idea what is what. So you have to click on the title of the window and it shows you a path. So now do this for 8 folders and now remember what one is what. In Konqueror it shows me the path and the same goes for Nautilus and Explorer. There is just no way I have found to do this in the Finder. I also can’t believe that OS X 10.3 STILL doesn’t have SSL WebDav support. Windows has had this since 2000, Konqueror and Nautilus both have this and yet I have to use Goliath for SSL WebDav. 2004-01-20 3:35 am Anonymous you do not need to use the up bar in finder, the back button works fine….. and since when is being a file browser and only a file browser a bad thing? the lack of a URL bar is a blessing. things are done diffrently on diffrent systems…accept it, learn it, and enjoy it for what it is, rather than hate it for what it is not. 2004-01-20 3:47 am Anonymous Ok what am I supposed to do to ‘learn’ this? How can I do what I need to do on OS X then? I don’t care if it doesn’t offer what I want as default but at least let me customize it. And a back button is not the same. Ok, here is an example. I am in a folder and I click another folder on the left that goes to my /projects/clientProjects folder. I want to go UP to my projects folder. If I click the back button it will take me BACK to the folder I was at before I clicked on the side bar icon /projects/clientProjects. Ok so what do I have to do? I have to click the title of the window and then click again onto the path above it. That is 2 clicks and having to read lines of text to find what I want. An up button lets me just click ONE button and not have to figure out what to click on. 2004-01-20 3:56 am Anonymous “For me, the biggest disapointment in OS X is the finder. The worst part is that there is no url type bar like in Explorer/Nautilus/Konqueror. There is no UP button! This drives me insane. It feels like some one has tied my hands behind my back. Here is an example of why this is bad not to show where your are in a URL type bar. ” This is why there is Column View it’s so much better, plus there is also a Path button you can use on the finder if you really care about that. Plus Apple doesn’t have a reason to integrate Safari or anything into the finder. Think about it for a second, it would take a while to integrate Safari into everything. I don’t see any reason to make Mac OS X more Windows like just for 1 minor ui element. “I have 2 open finder windows. They are in different directories but are both named “images”. Looking at the finder windows on my screen I have no way to know what one is what. I don’t know just by looking at the window if the one on the left is the one that i’m moving files TO or FROM. This isn’t a huge deal until you have 8 finder windows open and you’re organizing files, get up and leave, come back and you have no idea what is what. So you have to click on the title of the window and it shows you a path. So now do this for 8 folders and now remember what one is what. In Konqueror it shows me the path and the same goes for Nautilus and Explorer. There is just no way I have found to do this in the Finder.” First I would ask why you have given both folders nice descriptive names. If you did this on Windows or Linux it doesn’t matter it’s the same on OS X, both have the generic icon (unless you change it) and say the same name if you named them the same. You can give folders different icons, different names and different color labels. People complain about this, but this sounds more like a sloppy user not being descriptive or organized enough to create an organized work environment. I have several “Images” folders for sites,programs,etc and I give them different names,labels and sometimes icons which only takes a minute to do and have no problem sorting the windows I have. You have the tools to organize your work and know where everything is so use them. It sounds like your arguing that Mac OS X should be like Windows or Linux when it has it’s own solutions that are more powerfull than anything anywhere else. Oh yeah there is also Expose which also tells you where everything is. 2004-01-20 3:58 am Anonymous the URL bar is not a function that is nessisary on file browsers….notice that all those that have a URL bar are also HTML browsers. finder is not an HTML browser. as for going up one directory, use the columb view. that is what it is there for, and it is more efficent once you get proficent at it than an up button. 2004-01-20 4:05 am Anonymous Isn’t it annoying when people force into doing things the way they wantt you to instead of the way you want to? 2004-01-20 4:07 am Anonymous cmd+up arrow takes you up one directory. A lot faster than hitting a GUI button. Also, try cmd-clicking the folder in the titlebar of the Finder window. Shows a complete path of where you are. Acts like a path dropdown without needing to put one in your toolbar. And I also think everyone should use column view for 90% of file browsing. Easiest way to dig into folders that I’ve seen. 2004-01-20 4:13 am Anonymous Isn’t it annoying when people force into doing things the way they wantt you to instead of the way you want to? You’re not forced to do anything. First, you’re not forced to us OS X (I hope!). Second, you’re not forced to use the Finder. There are other options (notably Pathfinder). If you can’t find an option you like, write one. Isn’t that the “open-source way”? 2004-01-20 4:14 am Anonymous Why waste all your time clicking on icons, when you can just type the url you want “/home/rayiner/documents/*foo*” into the URL bar? Ugh. Another reason to hate graphical file managers. 2004-01-20 4:22 am Anonymous VNC is not enough. That is OK in a pinch. What OS X really needs is “Terminal Services”, such as the one from MS or Citrix. Since Most Apple applications don’t use Xwindows, they need to be able to do that. Plus, it will enable developers to create server based applications just like you see with Citrix. 2004-01-20 4:24 am Anonymous You’re not forced to do anything. First, you’re not forced to us OS X (I hope!). Second, you’re not forced to use the Finder. There are other options (notably Pathfinder). If you can’t find an option you like, write one. Isn’t that the “open-source way”? I’d hate to pay so much for a software only to realize I can’t just type the path to where my documents are. Bad…bad interface design on the part of Apple. Thats like telling me to browse the web without a URL locator. Afterall, web pages are just files. 2004-01-20 4:44 am Anonymous Shift – Cmd – G Pops up an entry box allowing you to type the path of where you’d like to go. To move up a directory use Cmd – Up Arrow. 2004-01-20 5:01 am Anonymous All these problems you guys are naming with the Finder sound like they come from you looking at screen shots and not actually using the Finder. Try using column view. Press Cmd + Up. Cmd click on the folder name in the titlebar. Shift + Cmd + G lets you type in folder URLs. Cmd + K connects to servers, including WebDAV, which if you’ve never used iDisk (Apples own service), it’s WebDAV. That’s how iCal published calenders. Or use another file browser/manager. 2004-01-20 6:58 am Anonymous Why waste all your time clicking on icons, when you can just type the url you want “/home/rayiner/documents/*foo*” into the URL bar? Cause its faster to click 3 icons than it is to type 30 characters. 2004-01-20 7:20 am Anonymous For me it would be the search feature (I’ve never used the Finder, only seen it). I’m using directory structures less and less now, because I spend much time trying to remember where I put things on my PC, as I do in real life. Since I started using iTunes, I’ve begun appreciating the flat file structure much more, as long as you have a good real time incremental search facility. If I’m not mistaken, it works almost in real time in the Finder as well? I’m seeing more and more programs utilizing incremental search, because it eliminates keypresses and you get instant feedback. Typing “.pdf” to get all my pdf docs spread all over the harddrive, displayed on my screen immediately, is much faster than to snake your way through directories. I couldn’t care less, where the things are stored. I really think I would use that a lot, if it’s as fast as what I saw. 2004-01-20 7:39 am Anonymous I doubt its faster to find *and* click 3 icons than to type the URL path, especially given that any decent file manager gives you autocompletion in the URL bar. 2004-01-20 8:08 am Anonymous I dont doubt its faster to find and click files on the explorer than the command line, because in many cases i found the tree folder view indispensable at understanding quickly the structure of my floders. There’s no doubt that most people understand visual concepts easier than abstract. Hunting for files would be alot quicker if you can see the overall overview. As for the quickness of autocompletion, its not nirvana either, especially with folders with many files beginning with the same letters, such as the documents folder. When there are similar files than you would either still have to type many letters or use the up or down arrow key, which still leads to inefficiency. So all this explanation is to answer your first question of why “waste” time with graphical file managers. No doubt both approaches have its stregths and weaknesses, but its not hard to understand at all why anyone would like to able to use both, and both can lead to completing jobs quicker. Good thing many OSes allow both approaches, including OSX. 2004-01-20 8:20 am Anonymous The whole problem was that OS X did *not* have a URL bar, and thus did *not* allow both approaches. 2004-01-20 10:10 am Anonymous Shist-Cmd-G 2004-01-20 10:28 am Anonymous And before you ask, yes shift-command-g in the finder has tab-completion. 2004-01-20 10:30 am Anonymous Most complaints I have seen about OS X, the Finder (or any application or system) come from people who are angry because things don’t work like they used to work on that other system they had before, or because some function is apparently inexistant (that’s what they assume). In fact, most complaints are the result of an unwillingness to change, and of ignorance. Most complaints come from people who never bother to read any documentation. About all the solutions to the “problems” exposed here are in the Finder’s help. 2004-01-20 12:08 pm Anonymous It’s fast even on a G3. At first, I thought the new finder would suck but after a couple of weeks I found it was a great! improvement! More efficient than before and access to your folders is a snap. Also Exposé is excellent too. It’s sooo useful and easy. Apple always has the cool stuff. Apple is king of UI. I have never seen an OS that comes NEAR Mac OS X’S greatness. After using Mac OS X for a few years, you realise that Windows XP has a really miserable UI. 2004-01-20 12:49 pm Anonymous Firstly my complaints come as a result of using panther for over 3 months, not from looking at screen shots. The reason I have folders named the same thing is because when doing website development each project has an “images” folder! Now I need to often copy files from one project to another. I open both /images folders and there isn’t anything that tells me what project is what at that point. In every other file browser it gives me a path at the top and I can see that i’m in /projects/projectName/images. No, giving them different colors is not going to help me. I need to see WHERE I am. Clicking on an icon to reveal the path isn’t going to help me much because I have several of these folders open at once and am I supposed to click on each title each time to make sure I’m on the right folder? It’s a hell of a lot more efficient to just SEE the path all the time. Also it takes more clicks to click on the title, figure out what dir I want to move up to and click it than it does to just click an up button. It’s funny to see all the zaelotry and unwillingness to recognize a serious flaw in the Finder. Why should I be forced to learn to do something that takes me MORE time? Am I to have to move my hand from my mouse each time I want to go up a directory so that I can push cmd+up. If that is built into finder then surely you must understand that it’s there for a reason ie. people wanted it! So why not also give a GUI button to click on to go up? I’m just saying that I’d like the ability to have an up button and have a url type path bar there. It doesn’t have to be standard, it could be optional. Other OSes have them there for a reason, because they work. Next you’ll be telling me that Apple should remove the GUI buttons that close windows because “CMD+Q” closes windows just fine! 2004-01-20 1:14 pm Anonymous “And before you ask, yes shift-command-g in the finder has tab-completion.” Really? Pressing < tab > brings the OK button to focus for me. “Next you’ll be telling me that Apple should remove the GUI buttons that close windows because “CMD+Q” closes windows just fine!” It doesn’t; it closes applications. 2004-01-20 2:14 pm Anonymous “It doesn’t; it closes applications.” Ok but you get my point. 2004-01-20 2:34 pm Anonymous Really? Pressing < tab > brings the OK button to focus for me. Doesn’t for me! Pressing tab auto-complete’s the path. Are you using Panther? It might be a “new feature”. As for the Finder issues. Yes, I agree, it can be a PITA not being able to see your exact location just by looking at the finder window. OS X isn’t perfect. It is, however, much better than most other operating systems, IMHO. Apple also seem to be a company that listens, so head over to their support forums, and ask for the feature. If enough people want it, they’ll add it! 2004-01-20 3:09 pm Anonymous For crying out loud quit your whinning about Finder. Finder has this really cool feature. Right click on the toolbar (if you use a 2 button mouse) or control click on the toolbar (if you use a 1 button mouse) and select customize toolbar. In the seet that comes up there is a button that has what looks like a gear and down arrow. Drag that up to your tool bar. Place it anywhare you want on the tool bar. When you click on this button it provides you with a directory structure. Now instead of hitting an up button, as you do in Windows exporer, you can pick which directory above your current location you would like to go to. This feature is in Panther, Jaguar and earlier releases of OS X. The other thing is who really gives a rats @$$ about typeing a URL into the finder. If you open the menu and select “connect to server” then type in the URL it opens up the default application based on protocoal and takes you where you want to go. That’s really difficult isn’t it? This include SMB, NFS, FTP, HTTP, etc. Learn how to use the damn thing and quit expecting someone to spoon feed you all the answers. 2004-01-20 3:40 pm Anonymous I already know all about what you are talking about. But I’m saying that this takes more time and effort and still doesn’t show you at all times where you are at! Sure my folder title says “images” but images where? Oh I have to click to find out. Great, now do that on 6 different folders and try to keep track. 2004-01-20 3:46 pm Anonymous Ya know it’s not even that it needs a URL bar, just but some text at the bottom of the window that shows you where you are. Something that simple would be great. Heck make the title of the window have the option of showing the path. Do like PathFinder does and create tabs that show you your path. It just needs *something*. 2004-01-20 4:16 pm Anonymous “Despite the 10.3 designation, Panther is much more than just a point release. It’s easily the equivalent of stepping up from Windows 2000 to XP, with as many new features as significant improvements to existing ones.” (From the article) Actually, just being pedantic here but isn’t XP a point release? Dan 2004-01-20 4:35 pm Anonymous Good point. I would say that for 2000 to XP it’s pretty much just a release point but from say WinME to XP it’s not. 2004-01-20 5:47 pm Anonymous I am relativly new to Mac i bought a used used G4 550mhz powerbook on ebay upgrading it to 1GB of memory and adding a new 60GB 16mb buffer toshiba drive and an airport card. I have relativley few complaints one being the crappy mail program which i replaced with Eudora that is only marginally better. i plan on buying Entourage when i get back to the world. The only other thing is application launch speed..its slow but i am willing to forgive that aspect since its only a 550. In my opinion Pather is a hell of a improvement from OS9(one of the reasons i stayed away from mac so long). Personally i can’t understand all the complaints. Nothing is perfect but i think Panther is very close. 2004-01-20 5:50 pm Anonymous I totally agree with the complaints. It has been my observation as a software developer, that the needs of developers are often quite different than those of the average user. It is quite common, and completely sensible to have very similarly named directory paths. Additionally, development projects often have so many files and paths involved that the last thing in the world we are going to do is color code things…I for one will forget within a day which one is green and which one is red. Developers often think in hierarchically. Consciousness of the hierarchical arrangement of files is often REQUIRED by development tools. Java packages and web archives for example. We NEED to be able to see the full path (or url) name of the file we are working on. And that silly path drop-down is not it. I don’t want to go through that extra step of clicking on that thing to see where I am. Yes, PathFinder provides this functionality in a very innovative way, but PathFinder is often slow. Also whether it is faster to type or click mouse buttons depends upon several factors: If your hand is ALREADY on the mouse, it is faster if your next action allows you to stay on the mouse, rather than move to the keyboard. Likewise, if your hands are already positioned on the keyboard, it is faster to stay there rather than move to the mouse. And if you can’t type with good accuracy and decent hand position, then chances are, clicking mouse buttons is going to be faster. And if you have a lousy memory for key strokes (like me) and/or have given up trying to keep straight the subtle differences in key strokes between linux, mac and windows (like me), then GUI buttons are downright necessary, as long as they are in plain sight and not deeply buried menu entries. I also agree about the need for an UP button. This is necessary in both Finder and Safari. UP is used to access the next higher level in the hierarchy. BACK is used to return to the previously viewed page. They are very different, and those who don’t understand this distinction should stay out of the discussion until they do understand it. I work on linux systems where UP is found on both the browser and the filemanager (KDE) and believe me, cmd+ is no substitute. Please stop attacking functionality ideas because YOU can’t see a purpose for them in your limited little world. At least have the commen sense to inquire about why a person wants something to work in a specific way before you tell them that they should do things differently. 2004-01-20 6:48 pm Anonymous For crying out loud, just try to view your Finder windows in the CMD-2 style, which, IIRC is the same view as when one does “Explore…” (or Windows-E) in Win. You will have a collapsable view of all your folders, so if you have two windows in that view, you can see that there is one “image” folder under “foo” and another under “bar”. There you go! 2004-01-20 7:01 pm Anonymous You can set the Toolbar to provide a hierarchical dropdown menu of the current path. Additionally, you can command-click on the title of the window to see the same listing. You can also traverse up with the keyboard (command + up?). 2004-01-20 7:03 pm Anonymous True the back button works most of the time except for when I change my location via the Go menu. In this case the back button takes me back to where I was previously, not up from where I am. I like the hierarchical popup menu the best. 2004-01-20 7:09 pm Anonymous Before throwing Panther on either my iBook 600/640 ram or my DP867/1.25 ram, I thought I’d throw it on my 1999 Blueberry iMac 350/320mb ram. (iMac had been running YDL 3.0 which I found too much work to be useful.) iBook and DP867 both running 10.2.8 Window Resizing/Moving Not as fast as the DP, but smoother and faster than the iBook. Moving a window produces no ghosting or lag (unlike YDL). Opening Safari/System Settings Two bounces each on the iMac. 2/4 on the DP and iMac Boot time(time it takes to get to login window) iMac 50 seconds iBook 70 seconds DP867 50 seconds My iMac boots 10.3 in the same time that 2 G4s and 1.25 gigs of ram boot 10.2.8! (I predict a 30-40 second boot time on that DP when I get 10.3 installed.) (YDL boot time was 90 seconds.) 10.3 is so snappy on that $250 5 year old iMac that it just became a production machine in my household. — 2004-01-20 7:10 pm Anonymous For those who insist on typing in a path in the Finder, it should be noted that when supplying the path, you can press the tab key to auto complete the portion of the path you are typing. So that if I want to go to /Library, I need only type /Li[TAB] to finish /Library for me. 2004-01-20 7:11 pm Anonymous That works if I am only a couple folders deep. What happens when I’m 8 folders deep? I can only see the last 2 folders to the left of me. So I can see that I’m in /WEB-INF/classes but not in WHAT webapp I’m in. Again this does me little good. Here is an example of a typical place I’m at /torrey/projects/clientProjects/org/_foo/src/WEB-INF/classes/org/foo/ Ok now I need to copy the JARS from there into 2 other webapps that have identical structures as this one. How do I tell what one of the 3 is the source and what ones are to recieve the updated files? Don’t you see, there NEEDS to be something that gives the path! I need to be able to look somewhere and see that i’m in /clientProjects/org/_foot/…etc. and not /Library/Tomcat/webapps/_foo/WEB-INF/classes/ In this case all I see on all 3 windows is the folder WEB-INF on the left with the folder classes highlighted, then in the middle I see the folder _foo highlighted and then on the right I see the contents of the _foo folder. Aside from that, even if it did show me enough of the path via this method, it is still much more difficult to look at each pane and figure out what one is highlighted and then in your head reconstruct the path. Much easier just to SEE the path listed right there so you have no question. So please stop acting like I’m just ignorant of the features of Finder. I know what Finder can do and that is why I know that what I want is something that Finder lacks and that is a problem. OSX is a great OS, don’t get me wrong, but Finder is it’s weakets point IMO. 2004-01-20 7:36 pm Anonymous As others have mentioned, the Mac OS X Finder does have a URL bar which is easily accessed with shift-command-“g”. “Tab” autocompletion also works in this URL bar, provided you are attempting to autocomplete an actual path. If not, the “tab” key will shift focus to the “OK” button. Using column view in the Finder also facilitates navigation because you can easily move up and down, as well as within, directories with the cursor keys. Easier still, you can type the first few characters of any directory or file to jump to it. This can be very efficient. 2004-01-20 7:53 pm Anonymous Notwithstanding my previous comment (and no, I’m not contradicting myself) I agree with you. You want to know where you are at first glance. Perfectly legitimate. And Mary’s right, if you use the mouse then you need an “Up” button, if you use the keyboard the shortcut will do. You’re right. Apple could do better. Pathfinder may be the solution, but Apple could do better. Michel has a workaround, but it’s just that, a workaround (you lose a lot of screen place when a path in the title bar or an adress bar would do). 2004-01-20 8:11 pm Anonymous For the 10 people in the world that apparently need this functionality: http://www.cocoatech.com/ 2004-01-20 8:13 pm Anonymous It just takes two mouse clicks to do it (using the Path button in the tool bar). 2004-01-20 8:22 pm Anonymous A $34 solution on top of a $1,200 purchase But something I’m looking into. I’m just glad that I have explained fully the problem. I know that this is not an issue with a lot of people but it is for most developers. If Apple wants to get more geeks to come over to OS X it should at least let you customize the finder to do these crucial things (path bar, up button). I honestly would still be using Linux had I not needed a native Photoshop CS and Flash MX. 2004-01-20 8:27 pm Anonymous well, most profecionals using PS CS use OS X 😉 2004-01-20 8:43 pm Anonymous Torrey, be careful saying that most developers need a URL bar–if that’s what you’re referring to. I too am a developer and rarely need this sort of functionality. Of course I try not to have too many windows in front of me at any time, opting to shrink them into the Dock when not used. (I realize this may compound the problem, but I’m still typically unaffected by this. Some need it, some don’t I guess.) The trouble with a persistent path is that they can tend to get too long. In theory that string can go beyond the boundaries of the window it pertains to. What then? Even in the terminal (under Jaguar) the path is truncated to the last couple of directories. Perhaps it’s just me, but I can usually tell where I am based on the contents of the window too. 2004-01-20 8:47 pm Anonymous If we had the path visible then our self-proclaimed-GUI-god at asktog would be complaining that Finder windows take up so much space and use URLs that typical users find confusing! lol 2004-01-20 8:49 pm Anonymous Sure, it’s an extra $34. But the line on features has to be drawn somewhere. I have spent hundreds on software to tweak my system. But I don’t mind. I like the core system and I spend my money on the things I want to change (which I am sure are very different from what other users spend money on…if any). No system will work the best for everyone. That’s the OS “kitchen sink” mentality but you’ll notice it hasn’t exactly been catching on in the desktop world…. 2004-01-20 9:58 pm Anonymous Absoultely. Although most professionals using PS CS aren’t also doing very extensive application development. Again I said most. There are some who do (such as I). But so many of the art people I’ve met aren’t terribly good coders and visa versa. 2004-01-20 10:29 pm Anonymous Most (not all, but MOST) of the complaints are addressed in the Finder — many people simply have not properly customized the Finder or do not know the shortcuts. I can personally traverse the Finder three or four different ways in all the views. For those that want to navigate by typing path names, there is the Terminal. For those who want other options there are at least 5+ alternative file browsers for OS X. So what’s the whining about? 2004-01-20 10:48 pm Anonymous Can you name some of the viable alternatives? I know of PathFinder but that’s it. I’d be interested in trying some others. 2004-01-20 11:45 pm Anonymous If that can help? http://www.mucommander.com/ http://maco.gamesweb.sk/portfolio/software/aaw.mo/ http://www.kai-heitkamp.com/ I believe the second doesn’t have paths. 2004-01-20 11:58 pm Anonymous Thanks, I’ll check those out 2004-01-21 2:07 am Anonymous if you like the URL bar, why not do your copying in the terminal? then you can just type commands and get it done in a nice batch, or you could use an apple script to automate it all for you…these are solutions that apple offers for quick powerful functionality. 2004-01-21 4:00 am Anonymous I actually tend to work in the Terminal and the Finder. It’s really convenient to drag an object to the Terminal and have the path appear at the cursor. Does anyone know if it’s possible to open a Finder window at the current path from the command line? 2004-01-21 5:16 am Anonymous Does anyone know if it’s possible to open a Finder window at the current path from the command line? open . 2004-01-21 5:39 am Anonymous I’m also a developer. I understand what your are saying, but I really don’t have a need to put a presistant URL bar on the finder. Even when if there was one and I was dealing with a deep directory strucutre like you would find when developoing Java packages, I would more than likely use more than one Finder window. I have a tendency to do that no matter what platform I’m developing on, Solaris, Windows, OS X. Even the shift-command-g, which I just learned about, wouldn’t change the way that I use my “file manager/Finder” to navigate directory strucutres when developing 2004-01-21 5:49 am Anonymous Thanks Lars, The “open .” or “open <substitue any path name>” is a nice tip. As a matter of fact it works for files to. Try typing in “open <path/filename>” and it will open the file in the default application for that file type. Way Cool. 2004-01-21 9:41 am Anonymous man, Im surprised to see so many people cling to file browsing which originates from the early days of computing. Why navigate through your system using a format from the 70’s when you can use the much more efficient and powerful column view? The fact of the matter is- all you guys complaining about the Finder have a strong case of *fear of change* UI development is moving forward; why resist it, for the sole reason that your unfamiliar with it? Ya know it’s not even that it needs a URL bar, just but some text at the bottom of the window that shows you where you are. Something that simple would be great. Heck make the title of the window have the option of showing the path. Do like PathFinder does and create tabs that show you your path. It just needs *something*.