Why does Finder SUCK??? - Page 2

knight885 · #9 March 1st, 2007, 01:57 PM

Path Finder looks nice, downloading it now.

Finder just doesn't do enough, and what it does it does erratically and inconsistently. No Tree view? Changing view between columns, icons and list whenever it feels like it? Searching for files I know are there doesn't find them? Toolbar only customisable with the least used tools (no copy/paste)? It's the 21st century, and Finder is straight out of 1992 AmigaOS.

I don't think it's better than Windows Explorer, it's as mediocre as Windows Explorer.

ora · #10 March 1st, 2007, 03:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by knight885

...Finder is straight out of 1992 AmigaOS.

Hey! I loved AmigaOS, workbench was amazing, in its day anyway. What was that early graphics program called, Deluxe paint?

knight885 · #11 March 2nd, 2007, 01:19 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ora

Hey! I loved AmigaOS, workbench was amazing, in its day anyway. What was that early graphics program called, Deluxe paint?

So did I - in it's day.

ApeintheShell · #12 March 2nd, 2007, 01:29 PM

I think the 'Finder Sucks' complaint comes from the intermediate - advanced Mac OS users. There are some features that those Mac users refused to let go of when we transitioned to Mac OS X.
It actually delayed Mac OS X as people's primary operating system from 2001-2004. Apple kept crippled Mac OS 9 by calling it Classic and emulating it. You had to switch resolutions for games and this messed up everything. Even looking at the Mac OS 9 Apple menu was inconvenient. No wonder people stopped using Mac OS 9 in favor of Mac OS X. It was a forced migration. I dual boot Mac OS 9 for older games or Nostalgia but I wouldn't keep it long because I was an early adopter and thought the change represented my generation of Mac users.
In many ways Mac OS 9 is a more advanced operating system. It is an evolution of a user interface that was consistant and just worked. The Desktop was not a folder. It was used to place your documents, images, and other files you were working with until you could move them to a folder in the Finder. You switched applications using the Multi-Finder, etc. In many ways Mac OS 9 had to go.
People didn't like the Mac OS because it was what they used in elementary school or they had a bad experience with them. Windows 95 was the operating system of choice before anyone knew what an operating system was. The business industry adopted Microsoft and the schools kicked old Macs to the curb. PCs were cheap and you could keep Windows 95 on them for quite a long time. Microsoft Windows would later develop tons of bugs and viruses but Apple did not promote their Mac OS 9 features that made it better than Windows is so many ways on television. That is where the majority of people spend their free time. There was the "Think Different" campaign which alienated a lot of people. Who could compare themselves to Bob Dylan? It might have inspired some people but not the majority. There was also the bias that the Mac was only for "creative people". How many people complained about games, games, games? I never heard the end of it. The Macintosh was one of a kind and it was expensive. If you could buy a PC for $499 that includes a monitor, keyboard, mouse, Microsoft Windows, and plenty of things to get started. What is the incentive to buy a Power Mac and then pay an additional amount of cash for a monitor. Now when the iMac came out it was promoted to death and a lot of people bought the iMac. But it still fell behind the competition and was expensive.
So how does any of this history relate to the Finder? If you have a operating system that is perceived to be for elitist snobs even though it has an easy to use interface and just works than it won't matter if the Finder is the best feature in that operating system.
But if you have a campaign that promotes the positives of the Mac and the Finder is just one of the features included in Mac OS X than more people are likely to buy it. It was a business decision to use the metal interface to make it more familiar to Windows switchers. Thus the reason why new users don't have the same complaint as older users.

Yesurbius · #13 March 2nd, 2007, 02:37 PM

So seriously then, what would be a better approach than Finder? Some things to consider:

1) It would have to run as Finder does - not a windowed app; rootless (ie. Finder *IS* the desktop)

2) It would have to remain intuitive, usable, and coherent with the underlying file system (ie. home directories, etc)

3) It'd need to be visual, have the ability to locate files and apps quickly, while also allowing you to manipulate the underlying file system.

4) It couldn't be too much of a resource hog.

simbalala · #14 March 2nd, 2007, 03:52 PM

I check this thread from time to time just to see what’s being said. There have been some fair points made but I still think the same thing I always think when I read these threads.

What is with you people?

You’d think that people spend their entire day mucking around in the Finder and we all know they don’t. I probably spend all of 10 minutes a day using it, if that. It does the job pretty well and a tiny inconsistency here or there affects hardly anyone. To get past those inconsistencies there is a host of third party utilities, most of them free.

Yesurbius · #15 March 2nd, 2007, 04:55 PM

Quote:

You’d think that people spend their entire day mucking around in the Finder and we all know they don’t. I probably spend all of 10 minutes a day using it, if that. It does the job pretty well and a tiny inconsistency here or there affects hardly anyone. To get past those inconsistencies there is a host of third party utilities, most of them free.

We may only spend 10 minutes mucking around in Windows (in between getting into our apps), but it doesn't mean we live with it and run windows does it ??

sylense · #16 March 3rd, 2007, 02:45 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by simbalala

...I probably spend all of 10 minutes a day using it, if that...

Actually, I would have to disagree with that. If you count up all the times you move files, rearrange your desktop, download files somewhere and then rearrange them, and all that, you would find that the finder is an integral part of using the OS.

Also, Finder is the graphical interface to the directory structure and as such is a primary application.

So, most of my issues with finder have already been pointed out, however, I do have two quick points.

1.) Path Finder is a great application to use in addition to Finder, but not as a replacement (see point 2)

2.) Be forewarned that replacing finder with an app like Path Finder may break things.