# Leopard to Feature Redesigned Finder



## kainjow (Oct 20, 2005)

link

Looks good to me


----------



## NarutoSasuke (Oct 20, 2005)

Well, better start saving my money in order to buy Leopard, a better file system means that we continue to beat Windows in every possible way, lol. Now Windows users cannot complain about the ALREADY easy-to-use File system.


----------



## Veljo (Oct 21, 2005)

The current Finder is pretty good I think, but it can be improved on. It'll be interesting to see what they come up with.


----------



## fryke (Oct 21, 2005)

I personally think it's too early for "real" information on Leopard's Finder. And that article just seems like guesswork to me. I mean: Of _course_ they're going to do something with the Finder. And _of course_ Spotlight will become better implemented (they can't NOT do it...). The soft factors he claims, have even been already claimed for Tiger (work with files like with songs in iTunes thing...) by Steve Jobs, so I, too, would guess he won't walk away from that.


----------



## texanpenguin (Oct 21, 2005)

I agree, that site couldn't look less authoritative.

It's mere conjecture.


----------



## fryke (Oct 21, 2005)

Well, he _did_ have interesting information in the past, I give him that (was on this forum as a user, too, IIRC?), I'm merely looking at _this_ article now...


----------



## CreativeEye (Oct 21, 2005)

its a blog site- looks like its powered by wordpress etc. maybe they are looking for 'hits' as leopard will be the next big rumour...

although - it's more than likely a no brainer - but spotlight has such a wealth of underlying power / functionality that Apple could still tap into...the 2nd iteration of spotlight - good times.


----------



## Lt Major Burns (Oct 21, 2005)

it's all good. i hate the finder.


----------



## HomunQlus (Oct 21, 2005)

I agree, it's too early, far too early to start to speculate or spread rumors about Apple's next thing.

"Leopard" will of course have some very interesting new features, probably a re-write of Finder. Or maybe a new dock. Maybe a new GUI altogether. Who knows? 

It's supposed to come out late next year, so let's just wait.


----------



## RGrphc2 (Oct 21, 2005)

It is too early to know what is going to happen in Leopard, but i wouldn't be surprised if Spotlight eventually becomes Finder.


----------



## kainjow (Oct 21, 2005)

I think he has a credible source. He posts some info on there before anyone else from other sites (Think Secret, AppleInsider, etc). So I'd say this is real info.


----------



## Mikuro (Oct 21, 2005)

I agree that it's something of a no-brainer. Apple needs better Spotlight integration. I just hope that they don't _replace_ the Finder with some strictly-Spotlight system.

I hope they rewrite the Finder from the ground up. It's just sad how poorly written it is. For such a vital part of the OS, there's no excuse for it to be anything but _perfect_. It's been neglected for 5 years, updated only to tack on new features here and there. And then they proceed to neglect those new features for the rest of their lifespan.....

If they fix the Toolbar Madness and make file renaming work the way it did in OS 9 again, I'll be happy. But those are big IFs.


----------



## NarutoSasuke (Oct 21, 2005)

Hmm, just started using a Mac and I'm using Tiger, so I've been a Windows person for a good portion of my computer life. I have a question, what's so wrong with Finder, why does it need an upgrade? I just haven't noticed anything yet, but interested in what you guys have to say.


----------



## nixgeek (Oct 21, 2005)

My only issues with it are the inconsistencies within the Finder as far as overall look and feel.  As for anything else, I haven't had a problem with Tiger.  I'm hoping that Leopard does improve on the look-and-feel aspect.


----------



## Lt Major Burns (Oct 21, 2005)

NarutoSasuke said:
			
		

> Hmm, just started using a Mac and I'm using Tiger, so I've been a Windows person for a good portion of my computer life. I have a question, what's so wrong with Finder, why does it need an upgrade? I just haven't noticed anything yet, but interested in what you guys have to say.



it's, for me, the inconsistency.  
* you open a folder, it could be in _any_ view before you find out, icon, list or column, so then you have to change it if it is wrong.  

* there's no true 'up-one-level' button, only back

* disk images can be in any view format they want, (including sans-toolbar) again, another inconsistency.  

* there's not enough different ways of sorting the views in list

* "Kind" only specifies between video, or image, not file extension. (a jpeg is drastically different to gif, for example 

* there is no way of previewing the file in the ist view. (last column in column view, icon preview in icon view, but then this only works well if you have full 128x128 icons set). 

* the fact that if you click on a file in column view, it dissappears to the left, away from your mouse cursor to accomodate the last, new column for previewing

* In column view, the name appears to stretch as far as the column, but actually you can only click on the length of the text.

* also in column view, you can only sort by name (default), not kind, size or date etc.  (see above for kind issues)

i can't think of any more right now, but that's my look on it.


----------



## nixgeek (Oct 21, 2005)

The "up one level" is actually there and is a hold-over from the Pre-OS-X days.  If you hold down the Command key (aka the Apple key) and click on the title name of the finder window, you'll get a hierarchical list of the folders traversed.  I found it by chance once.  Apple should make this known to the user if they haven't already, IMO.

I do share a lot of the gripes that you do, Burns.  One that especially annoys me is when you are in Column View and you select the application icon that you want to launch.  Normally if you just select it, it will show a Preview that will tell you some information on the icon.  However, if you double click on a specific icon without thinking of viewing the following column containing the Preview info, that Preview colum still shows up while loading the app from having double clicked the icon within the list and it moves everything around causing a bit of confusion in the whole process.  If I double click on the icon, it shouldn't show me the information about it in the Preview column...just launch the darned thing and be done with it.  If I just highlight it, then let me know what it is.


----------



## Mikuro (Oct 21, 2005)

For me, it's the virtually incomprehensible way toolbars are handled. Sometimes they're there, sometimes they're not. You can't specify it on a window-by-window basis.....except, of course, when you can. If you don't think that made any sense, good. That means you're sane.

The problem stems from the fact that windows are no longer directly associated with the folders they represent (except, of course, when the are. Yay!). You can have a dozen different window open, all displaying the same folder, and all with different settings. So when you close a window...where are those settings saved? Good luck figuring THAT one out. It seems like Apple just doesn't give a darn about anyone who likes to do things the "old" way. "If you don't like column view in toobar windows, then you don't matter!" seems to be Apple's new motto with OS X.

Furthermore, newly created folders all have the same view options, no matter what. Icon view, blah blah blah. In OS 9, a new folder inherited the view options from the folder that contained it, and its window position was offset a bit so it would not entirely overlap its parent folder.

Also, a lot of little things have just gotten worse since OS 9, like, again, renaming files. It was so simple in OS 9. In OS X it's a chore. You click on the file name. You wait. You realize it's not going to bring up the editor. So you click again. You wait again. The editor finally comes up! But it's...blank, and doesn't respond to anything. So you select another file, and try again. In OS 9 this "just worked". You click the name, and it'll wait a split second to allow for double clicking. After that, you were in editing mode. And if you didn't want to wait, all you had to do was move the mouse after clicking (since obviously you're not interested in double-clicking if you've moved the mouse) and the editor popped up immediately. Soooo nice. This feature is completely gone in X.

Finally, the "snap to grid" option is all but useless in OS X, because for some reason it insists on spacing the grid spaces more than 128 pixels apart, no matter what size your icons are. Greeeeat. In OS 9 the grid was TIGHT, and it would snap objects the nearest point where the names wouldn't overlap the next one. It was so much better. Icon view in X is a pain in the butt.

There are more little quirks in the Finder. Apple mixes a lot of metaphors when they designed it, and they never made the effort to make them play nice with each other. The result is an interface that is unpredictable and defies logic.

End rant.


----------



## Lt Major Burns (Oct 21, 2005)

it is actually one area where i like windows.  explorer, is (don't kill me), a very good way of accessing files.  it's very consistent, it's always the same!  if it isn't, it's because you've turned the sidebar off, or changed the view _yourself!_.  explorer windows are ALWAYS the same.  it's just the lack of technology in the appearance of it that lets it down.


----------



## NarutoSasuke (Oct 21, 2005)

I can see where you guys come from and I can see how stuff like that can get annoying. Hopefully, many of these issues can be handled with a new version of Finder, one that works with the already wonderful "Spotlight" would be a good upgrade.


----------



## smithy (Oct 21, 2005)

One thing that pisses me off about Finder, is generally how long it takes to open eg. Applications folder. Finder just seems really slow to me in some ways. The Finder in Tiger is the best so far, but still has a lot to be desired. In comparison Panther to Tiger, Finder would take ages to actaully get a thumbnail pic of around 130 image files. In Tiger it is alot quicker, so I can defanitly see a major overhual trend of the Finder in Leopard. 

Lt Major Burns, i can't belive you like windows explorer!!! Actually don't worry i do to for some reason. It does seem zippy even on the slowest of machines, but like you said it is just the lack of technology, appearance and stability that lets it down.


----------



## g/re/p (Oct 21, 2005)




----------



## fryke (Oct 21, 2005)

Yeah, they _should_ have just offered column view to replace all other views instead of half-heartedly bring along "old style" Finder windows that have _not_ worked consistently in _any_ version of OS X since. But Ars Technica has, I think, about three dozen articles on that very subject...


----------



## mindbend (Oct 21, 2005)

Those are pretty good points, actually. Here's some more:

1. How about more and better previews (Illustrator for example. I mean, they can bring in AI files beuatifully into Keynote, do the same for the Finder previews. After all, they're really just PDfs these days. Same for Indesign files. And lots of others.)

2. Here's a subtle, but annoying one for me. If you have a folder of movies in column view and you stretch out the far right panel (so the movie plays bigger when you're previewing it), if you delete that movie or move it, the panel shrinks back to the original smaller size. I know, pretty obscure, but I tend to preview a lot movie files in column view.

3. For the love of god, can someone write a shareware app that shows me file size total (like maybe putting in the bottom of a window or something) when I select files without making me open a Get Info window?! 

4. Didn't the Finder very recently (pre-Tiger) used to show Get Info's on multiple windows by "summing" the data? In other words, if you selected ten files and chose Get Info (Command+I) it would bring up one summary window, not ten, right? Or am I crazy? Did they go back to the stupid OS 9 way of bringing up ten Get Info windows? Is that a preference somewhere? I hate that. (Yes, I know about Command+Option+I, but that works a little differently in that it reacts to newly selected files and frustratingly doesn't close via Command+W. Could they please get more consistent with what things require Command+Q, Command+W or neitherif you choose Command+Option+I (you have to do Command+Option+I again. WTH?).

5. If you select multiple items in the column view, there's no summary window in the right panel. Huh? Just do some simple math computer, you're supposed to be good at that. (Hint: 2 MB plus 4MB equals 6MB.)

Other thoughts:

1. The Finder renaming mode is indeed too slow. It seemed like they fixed it a while back and then it slowed down again. I've resorted to taking the approach of implementing the Return key to get instant-edit mode. Still not as good as the quick mouse flick edit method of old. I can't comprehend Apple going backwards like that.

2. OS X does seem better overall at allowing keyboard navigation. I've become quite accustomed to primarily navigating via keyboard. Once you get used to it, it's surprisingly fast. Usually faster than a mouse.

3. I use iKey for launching apps and files as well as opening directories at the window size, format and position that I want. It gets around the Finder's somewhat inconsistent approach. For example, I set Control+D to open my documents folder at a set size and position. Way fast. Anyone who is navigating manually to their commonly used folders is wasting their time. I watch people digging through folders getting to things they use all the time. It makes me crazy.


----------



## Mikuro (Oct 21, 2005)

fryke said:
			
		

> Yeah, they _should_ have just offered column view to replace all other views instead of half-heartedly bring along "old style" Finder windows that have _not_ worked consistently in _any_ version of OS X since.


 If they had done that, I absolutely never would have upgraded to OS X. I mean it. The half-heartedness kept me away pretty long as it was, but if they'd done away with it altogether, I would've jumped ship. Better to have a slap in the face than a kick in the groin. I can't begin to describe how much I hate column view... (although I do think the general idea of it is great)



			
				mindbend said:
			
		

> 4. Didn't the Finder very recently (pre-Tiger) used to show Get Info's on multiple windows by "summing" the data? In other words, if you selected ten files and chose Get Info (Command+I) it would bring up one summary window, not ten, right? Or am I crazy? Did they go back to the stupid OS 9 way of bringing up ten Get Info windows? Is that a preference somewhere? I hate that. (Yes, I know about Command+Option+I, but that works a little differently in that it reacts to newly selected files and frustratingly doesn't close via Command+W. Could they please get more consistent with what things require Command+Q, Command+W or neitherif you choose Command+Option+I (you have to do Command+Option+I again. WTH?).


This is another thing that has simply confounded me since upgrading to Tiger. It's true, they used to always display in one window. I actually hated it that way, because most of the time I _wanted_ multiple windows (which surprises me when I think of it abstractly, but nevertheless, it's true in practice). So I'm actually glad they have two methods for this now. The problem is that it is, once again, implemented in an incomprehensible manner.

For one thing, like you mentioned, the Inspector is a floating window, whereas the normal Get Info is not. This has always bugged me. I just find it hard to imagine anyone wanting to use it that way. I usually want to take a glance at it and then close it. But since I can't close it from the keyboard, I always end up closing my active window instead by mistake. Ugh. It makes sense that it's a floating window when you consider the history of it, but at this point it really ought to be a plain window.

But the worst part is that sometimes the regular command-I DOES open the one grouped info window, just like before. Despite my best efforts, I've never been able to determine any rhyme or reason to this. It just happens every now then.  Go figure! It's possible this has been fixed in 10.4.2, but I can't say for sure since I never figured out a way to reproduce it reliably.


Most of my problems with the Finder can be summed up by saying that Apple no longer seems to reconsider the overall design of things when they make changes. They just make changes and additions that sound good, but they don't revisit all the things these changes effect. Which, come to think of it, was my biggest beef about Windows' apparent design philosophy for many years.


----------



## Captain Code (Oct 22, 2005)

One thing I do hate about the Finder in Tiger is that if you are doing a lot of stuff involving disk access such as copying a lot of data to another drive, the Finder won't display any new directory listings.   It just sits there with a blank window, spinning that progress wheel around until the other disk activity is done.


----------



## fryke (Oct 22, 2005)

Mikuro: It was a little sarcasm...


----------



## senne (Oct 22, 2005)

A few things about the Finder:

1) Where is *command + x* aka *cut*? Is this pattented by Microsoft or so? Now you have to copy the file and paste it where you want to, and then you have to go back to the original file to delete it.

2) Not really a finder-thing... I want another way to resize windows, the one of alt-resizing. Hold the option-key and resize, the window will expand in both direction of resizing. This already happens without the use of the option-key in Save/Open dialogues in applications.

3) A small thing: the selection of files in the Finder. It's just so... ugly. Especially with the ones that are labeled. 
	

	
	
		
		

		
			










4) It's totaly unclear in the image above in which folder the folder iTunes is located.


----------



## fryke (Oct 22, 2005)

1) While I wouldn't really mind them adding Cmd-X to Cmd-C, Mac users usually just _drag_ a file and then hover over the folders to let them spring-open. Drop them when you're "there".

2) Hm. Interesting. Would be nice, maybe, but probably only a few people would really want this...

3) The labels thing, yes.

4) But that's because of the labels, too, I guess? For me, column view shows where I'm at, as long as you don't set the window _just_ for the screenshot so that this not-so-obvious problem occurs.
What I find worse is that if I click on a shortcut in the left pane, I can't move to the left, i.e. to the parent folders of the one selected in the shortcut pane.


----------



## senne (Oct 22, 2005)

Another thing I dislike is that you can't create those shortcuts when you're in a Save/Open-box.


----------



## ElDiabloConCaca (Oct 22, 2005)

senne said:
			
		

> 3) A small thing: the selection of files in the Finder. It's just so... ugly. Especially with the ones that are labeled.


Hey, YOU'RE the one that chose lime-green label and orange highlight!  Is that really the _Finder's_ bad taste in colors, or _yours_?

Just kidding...


----------



## senne (Oct 22, 2005)

Ok, choice of color isn't my best...  But still, Apple's solution for selected labels is bad.


----------



## ElDiabloConCaca (Oct 22, 2005)

True -- I did like OS 9's implementation of Labels where the actual icon was colored -- although if the icon was intricate or included a lot of dark areas, sometimes it was hard to tell what color the label really was.


----------



## symphonix (Oct 22, 2005)

> * "Kind" only specifies between video, or image, not file extension. (a jpeg is drastically different to gif, for example...



Some of the underlying metadata introduced with 10.4 hints at some possiblities here that are actually quite exciting. For instance, the file-typing system introduced in 10.4 is heirarchical and allows multiple inheritance, so a GIF image might be considered an "Image" and also an "Animation". Animation is a sub-class of video.
The same plugin structure that performs spotlight indexing could easily determine whether a GIF has more than one frame or not, and choose whether or not to consider it an animation.
"Document" includes classes such as "Text", "Email message" and "PDF".

If this architecture were expanded sensibly, it could pop Spotlight into a whole other realm of power. It could also allow for automatic conversion of files by the addition of plugins in the OS itself. For instance, imagine in a few years time, using a program developed in 2006 to open a file format that wasn't invented until 2008. It would be like using Photoshop 7 to open a DNG digital negative file. Compatibility problems could be beaten by updates to the OS, without worrying about updating the apps themselves. 

Its hard to say exactly where and how the file system and Finder fwill develop in the near future, but the capabilities introduced "under the hood" in 10.4 are quite interesting and could be applied in lots of new ways.


----------



## Mikuro (Oct 22, 2005)

I agree about the label implementation. This is another example of Apple not revisiting their old decisions when they make new ones.

Specifically, they did not revisit the Dock, or consider it at all. Labels have no effect whatsoever in the dock, since the title isn't displayed  and that's exactly why you'd need the labels most! If the Dock displayed labels, I would milk it for all its worth as a user. As it is, I don't use it much for files and folders, because there's no way to distinguish them. As Bruce Tognazzini astutely points out at asktog.com, identical icons look identical.

While we're on the topic, I hate the OS X label menu with a fiery vengeance. Not only is it difficult to hit, but it's _impossible_ to use with the keyboard (via Universal Access), and it's impossible to assign shortcuts (via Keyboard & Mouse). Boo! I want a _real_ label menu, like in OS 9. Non-standard menu behavior makes me sad. 



			
				fryke said:
			
		

> Mikuro: It was a little sarcasm...


Doh! I guess I can no longer consider myself someone who "gets things".


----------



## ziess (Oct 22, 2005)

.


----------



## Lt Major Burns (Oct 22, 2005)

i find tog's comments on the dock strange. he says it's crap, for reasons i don't really care about, but offers no real solution, or in fact, any better examples of  such an interface.  this, therefore (i worked out in my head) must mean that the dock is the best example of such an interface.  nobody has done it better, and if it's flawed, then that must mean that it's a VERY HARD problem, best solved by the dock, upuntil now.

also, all his rants on interface niggles only really serve to highlight just how poorly designed and layed out _his website_ is.... ('read the top 10 bugs in history' list, for example)


----------



## Veljo (Oct 22, 2005)

I agree, the Dock is by far the best thing out there in my opinion. I mean OS 9 and earlier had nothing except for the Application menu, and Windows has a stupid bar with buttons. I find the Dock much handier, and I don't think anything on it needs changing.

PS. Who's tog?


----------



## mindbend (Oct 22, 2005)

I also flat out disagreed with many of To's dock issues, especially the one about having a specific "hit" area for activating the Dock. Is he crazy? That is a horrible idea. I love being able to whip my mouse down to the bottom of the screen (ANY area at the bottom) and get my dock. I do, however, admit to disliking the fact it often gets in the way when using many apps, Final Cut in particular. Sure, I can move it to the side, but it's a just a new can of worms. I would like an option (not by default) to only show the Dock if I'm holding the option (or other) key when I mouse to the bottom of the screen. Too bad Command+Space is taken for Spotlight, that would make a great Dock activation shortcut.


----------



## Mikuro (Oct 22, 2005)

Hmm. This is really getting a bit off topic, I guess. I'll try to keep this short...


			
				Veljo said:
			
		

> I agree, the Dock is by far the best thing out there in my opinion. I mean OS 9 and earlier had nothing except for the Application menu, and Windows has a stupid bar with buttons. I find the Dock much handier, and I don't think anything on it needs changing.


Actually, OS 9 also had the application floater, which, when configured properly, was a very high-density palette that worked a lot like the Dock (except that it ONLY displayed active apps). (And Windows should never, ever be used as a yardstick for UI design quality. )

To quote Tog once again: "The problem does not lie with the Dock itselfif it makes a great demo, leave it inbut with Apple's apparent belief that it is a complete solution." I agree completely.

I'm not in favor of stripping a bunch of functionality out of the Dock. If they want it to be a Swiss Army Knife, then hey, that's cool. I _do_ appreciate all the little things it does, and they're all useful in their own right (except the Trash; that really has no business being in the Dock, IMHO). But I _don't_ appreciate my entire toolbox being _replaced_ by a Swiss Army Knife! The Dock would be great as an _addition_ to the Classic solutions, but it's lousy as a substitute. For example, WindowShade and the Dock's minimization really serve two very different purposes, but Apple decided to replace WindowShade altogether, and as a replacement, I find the Dock's minimization completely worthless. The Dock replaced _so many_ things from OS 9; it does a whole mess of jobs, but most worse than the old dedicated solutions. That's not cool.

The result is that most people either A) adopt inefficient methods of getting their work done (e.g., digging through folders for just about everything, or putting it all on the desktop) or B) turn to third-party add-ons. I myself use RocketLauncher as a (poor) substitute for the Classic Apple menu. And ever since I first started using X regularly, I've avoided minimizing windows like the plague, because it's just not efficient for me like WindowShade used to be (Exposé goes a long way to addressing this, but that's really another story).

Honestly, if I had all my old solutions back  the Apple menu, the Application menu/floater, WindowShade, pop-up windows, the control strip, etc.  I wouldn't use the Dock at all, and I'd be able to work a lot more efficiently. IMO, the only thing the Dock replaces really _well_ is the Application floater. And even though it does, I'd still like to have a Classic-style application _menu_ in addition.



> PS. Who's tog?


One of the designers of the original Macintosh OS.


(Hey, I said I'd _try_ to keep it short; I never said I'd succeed.)


----------



## sinclair_tm (Oct 22, 2005)

You all want classic back?  The only way I could bear it was with third party stuff.  When OS X came out, I was using a PPC7500.  I was mad that it was not supported.  But when I found Xpostfacto, I got 10.1 off ebay really fast, and installed it.  It was mostly a geewiss thing.  It had somethings that I didn't like, but it was mostly because it was New to me.  Then I got 10.2, it made all the difference in the world.  After putting a G4/450 into the 7500, and 512mb ram, I never went back to OS 9 for any reason.  I loved the Finder and Dock in 10.2.  Then I found a DA G4/466 for sale, and got it.  It had 10.3.  I loved it even more.  Then after it came out, I got 10.4 and it is fantastic.  But I hate Spotlight, it never find what I want, and I hate how it sorts things by types and relevence.  And I hope the Finder never goes that way.  I like being able to 'file' things as I see fit, and I never have problems finding them.  In fact I love how the home folder has music, photos and movies folders in it, because that was how I have always sorted things.  And they were never more then 2 levels deep.  So coloum view has never been a problem.  Then with the get info window, tiger has three optins.  The standard get info, the inspector, and get summary.  The last is the one that opens only one window from muti files  with the combined totals.  
wow this turned into a rant.  my point is that I love os x because it is so different then os 9, and i feel that it is better and works just dandy for me as it sits.  if it goes to soptlight like navigation, then you can be sure that i will always have a terminal window open to move around in.  but whos to say that over time i might not learn to like it as apple has it again?


----------



## Stridder44 (Oct 22, 2005)

For the love of God, PLEASE give us a choice in our UI colors/themes. The same 2 "themes" (and i use the term loosely) are a joke. Give us a choice! For example, being able to choose between Aqua, Brushed, "Plastic", and whatever the new UI is.


----------



## Lt Major Burns (Oct 22, 2005)

Minimize/windowshade.

I hated windowshade. remove the window from my workspace, so i can see what i'm doing.  what are you doing...? why is the bloody title bar still there? bloody hell! i have 10 title bars _still_ present!.

i HATE windowshade.  one of the reasons why Classic needed to become classic.

minimize GENUINELY gets the windows out of the way for a bit. and only a bit. it doesn't become a dock resident, for gods sake.  it's so useful for preserving a window for a bit, or just getting out of the way without hiding it fully, and it still tells you it's there (why is there too much by the trash? ah! i remember!)

it also looks good.


----------



## fryke (Oct 23, 2005)

Hm. Since I have the dock hide automatically, I don't _see_ those. And since I have already open my applications, switch between apps using Cmd-Tab and open others by either double-clicking documents or using LaunchBar, I basically don't see the Dock anytime at all. Hence, I don't often minimise windows. I'd _love_ WindowShade, but I despise unsanity, so don't tell me there's a solution.  WindowShade lets you work in place, without having to move the mouse all the way down or on the side to reach for the Dock. And the menubars don't use much space. Apple _was_ working on "minimize in place" for Jaguar, but got rid of that idea. I loved it... Guess they thought it would look too messy.


----------



## nixgeek (Oct 23, 2005)

Stridder44 said:
			
		

> For the love of God, PLEASE give us a choice in our UI colors/themes. The same 2 "themes" (and i use the term loosely) are a joke. Give us a choice! For example, being able to choose between Aqua, Brushed, "Plastic", and whatever the new UI is.



I have to agree with you on this one.  Even if they would just allows us to change the colors for the menu, that would be fine.  I'm a little tired of the blue and would like to see a green highlight or some other color on the highlighting of menu selections, just like we had in OS 9.

Right now, I have a green background and I'm relegated to using the Graphite color scheme which isn't what I would have picked, but it's not blue at least.  A nice all-around green theme (not the window widgets specifically, just the highlighting at least) would be my preference.  That's how I have KDE and Gnome set up on my Linux machines.  The blue is a little tired if you ask me.

And it should have to be something that I have to "add-on" to my OS.  Just make it native please.


----------



## Stridder44 (Oct 23, 2005)

And System Sounds! Like in OS 9! I miss my system sounds :-(


----------



## nixgeek (Oct 23, 2005)

Stridder44 said:
			
		

> And System Sounds! Like in OS 9! I miss my system sounds :-(



Actually, those I could do without. ::ha::

I enjoyed them in the beginning when Mac OS 9 was new, but it quickly got annoying, especially when it sounded like it was lagging when going through the menus thanks to Virtual Memory being enabled. 

But yes, I think it should be included as well for those who, like yourself, can enjoy that stuff.


----------



## Mikuro (Oct 23, 2005)

Lt Major Burns said:
			
		

> Minimize/windowshade.
> 
> I hated windowshade. remove the window from my workspace, so i can see what i'm doing.  what are you doing...? why is the bloody title bar still there? bloody hell! i have 10 title bars _still_ present!.
> 
> ...


Fair enough. Now I'll tell you why I hate the Dock, and loved WindowShade:

99% of the time I want to collapse a window, it's because I'm _still working with it_. I just want it out of my way briefly  usually less than a second  just so I can see/access something behind it real quick. Then I want my window back. With WindowShade, BOOM! Out of my way, and back in focus in a split second.

With the Dock, I have to minimize it, then watch it go through its sucking effect rigamarole (which is an annoying time waster, but, of course, it's necessary when the window is going to an arbitrary location like the Dock), see/get what I want, then go hunting for it in the Dock to get it back. Ugh.

I only consider the Dock's minimization useful for long-term "storage" of windows. (I am tech-ifying the phrase "long-term" to mean "more than a minute". ) For that, it's great, and it blows WindowShade out of the water. But for what I used WindowShade for most, the Dock fails miserably.

Which is exactly my point: the Dock is not a good _replacement_. Great supplement, poor substitute.

Of course, now that we have Exposé, I don't find myself hurting for the lack of WindowShade nearly as much. I still wish I could accomplish what WindowShade did, but now I think more in terms of "I'd like a new Exposé mode" rather than "I want WindowShade back".


----------



## fryke (Oct 24, 2005)

WindowShade was _instant_ and _predictable_ compared to both minimizing and Exposé. Much better.


----------



## Lt Major Burns (Oct 24, 2005)

the fourth exposé option is one i want.  "remove current application briefly".  it';s been talked about on here before briefly, but it is something i'd definately use. just get safari out of the way to see how far the encoding is doing, for example.


----------



## smithy (Oct 24, 2005)

Yeah well if they don't include that, just update the command+tab function. Meaning if you hide safari and then it goes to your previous app, when you command+tab it should go back to safari - not the previos app before safari. 

I don't know whether Apple would do that one update to Expose' though. Maybe give Expose' some added features, like do a dashboard add more widgets action that reveals the files that would be placed on the desktop, therefore having the desktop clean. I dunno, i think everything is up in the air with Leopard right now.


----------



## cybergoober (Oct 24, 2005)

Mikuro said:
			
		

> But since I can't close it from the keyboard, I always end up closing my active window instead by mistake. Ugh.


Just wanted to pass on one bit of info, and leave the geekery to those more knowledgeable   

&#8984;&#8997;I closes the Inspector palette (same keyboard shortcut that opens it).

Carry on.


----------



## Rhisiart (Oct 24, 2005)

Expose is great. I just want items in the dock to be locked (i.e. can only be removed by holding down the alt key).


----------



## iPenguin (Oct 24, 2005)

I've mentioned this once before in another thread, but it's relevant here too, so I guess I'll mention it again, for anyone looking for a replacement for windowshade functionality, Geekbind: http://macupdate.com/info.php/id/14862  has a "fade window" key command that gets the frontmost window (or whichever window the mouse is over) out of the way for a couple of seconds (as long as you hold down the keys). It's not perfect, because you can't really open files or anything (although you can drag them, like say if you wanted to drag a folder of mp3's into iTunes), and it only hides one window at a time, but it still has some usefulness. (Just in case people start throwing things at me for spamming or something, it's not my app or anything. I just use it all the time for the exact things that people are complaining about, so I thought I'd pass it along.)


----------

