[OreoCookie]

For all people who want Apple to FTFF: what do you mean? What improvements would you like to see in future versions of the Finder? Would you want it more like Pathfinder?

(The intention of this thread is to find out what you want to have fixed, not to start yet another flame war.)

Try to keep it civil.

[RevEvs]

I dont want network volumes that get disconncted unexpectedly to freeze the whole OS until it tims out

[Millennium]

What they want is the OS9 Finder. Most people who actually use the FTFF abbreviation are quite open about this, seeing as it's a 100% Thalo-original term.

I am not trying to pass judgment on whether or not this is a valid concern, merely pointing out that FTFF and BBF9 ("Bring Back Finder 9") are basically interchangeable.

[OreoCookie]

Thanks for pointing that out, Millenium. I didn't know as I don't frequent thalo.net.

[Weyland-Yutani]

I've never read thalo.net either, I picked FTFF from an article in Macworld. Regardless it is a request for Apple to make a serious effort to write a Finder that is *on par* at least with what we lost when OS 9 was discontinued. Does it have to be the same? Of course not! Does it have to be as solid, as reliable, as intuative, as refined, as Mac-like as possible. Of course!

FTFF is an abbrivation that exists because since the release of OS X the Finder has had little or no attention from Apple. Some cosmetic changes and some new features but essentially it has been in maintainance mode since 10.0

That is what FTFF means. It is time. High time. Spacial mode would be appreciated as well

cheers

W-Y

[OreoCookie]

But what exactly do you mean by this? I was hoping to learn details and not just repeat platitudes.

[SMacTech]

Originally Posted by RevEvs

I dont want network volumes that get disconncted unexpectedly to freeze the whole OS until it tims out

Maybe the Finder becomes unusable during this time, but the whole OS, as you say, is not frozen.

YMMV, as it doesn't do that on any of my Macs.

However, I do wish they would fix that so there is better threading in the Finder.

[JKT]

Personally I would like them to fix the following five things the most:

1. The first window opened after login to actually use the column widths that I have set and not revert to the default every fricking time!

2. For the Sidebar to resize intelligently so that I don't experience this when I mount volumes:



3. For columns to likewise resize intelligently so I don't ever experience this:



IMO, it would be better if you could choose to always see a fixed no. of columns in a window. If you resize the window to make it larger, the e.g. 2 columns expand evenly to always fit the larger window. If you make the window smaller, the 2 columns shrink to always fit the window - in this case until a cut off point is reached (e.g. 20% of the screen's pixel width) and it then reverts to just a single column. If you resize the dimensions of the sidebar, the columns in the window would also resize to fit the newly decreased or increased area.

4. For the sidebar icons to behave like real objects so that when I drag them they are droppable (and therefore copyable) objects. If I want to remove them, then I should need to press a key combo.

5. The stupid ~100 image limit to the Finder slideshow.

[cla]

Originally Posted by Millennium

What they want is the OS9 Finder.

Ooooo, Millenium... Though I couldn't agree more, people are going to take swings at you for that. :>

I think the main concern with spatiality is that we have too many files to "go spatial on", and that this is an issue that needs addressing. Apple introduced packages, extending the file/folder metaphor into yet a method of encapsulating objects. Nice. In what other ways can the file/folder metaphor be extended?

A further extension of spatiality is to make iApps responsible for visualizing convenient file types. Opening a folder containing for instance mp3's would hand over the visualization to iTunes — an application that knows how to visualize mp3's, reading tags, downloading album art and so on.

I wouldn't then have to wrestle the concept of multiple representations of songs: The one in iTunes is the one. Since iTunes would be "just another Finder window", I could for instance drag songs from iTunes into e-mail messages for attaching.
Something I can't today.

Anyway, I want to add to the list. Below are my realistic suggestions:

Spotlight Indexing
I would like Spotlight to take folder names for what they are: meta data!
What, for instance, separates the countless numbers of "background.gif" on my hard drive? The folder in which they reside.

Docked Finder Windows.
This is what I miss the most from Mac OS 9. In combination with the old Finder's Button View, they really sped my workflow up. Unfortunately, the bottom of the screen is also the default dock location...

Faster Animations
I find using the Finder stressing. Icons snap in a decelerating manner. Why can't windows?

Side Bar Annoyances
I constantly turn the side bar off, for nothing. The next thing I know, in the next window I open, it's there again. On new drives, on old windows, on network shares. Something tells me Apple thinks we should use the side bar...

.webloc preview
I often drag proxies of web sites I wish to store temporarily to the desktop. I want them to get a preview icon of the web page they point to.

Radial Context Menus
User studies show their excellence over linear menus. The greatest issue of would be dynamic content, so they simply shouldn't be used for dynamic content. At least not in the first few steps of a selection.

Below are my somewhat not-so-realistic suggestions:
Ok, here's where I'll probably loose you:
* Remove the sidebar.
* Remove the dock.
* Introduce a screen cornered, click-to-invoke, system-wide, drag-sensible, customizable application menu, using easy-to-hit areas instead of icons.

Bridge the gap difference between icons, documents and windows, by:
* Letting windows minimize to any place on screen, indistinguishable from a "normal" icon.
* Letting every icon be an image of what I will see when I open or double click that icon (toolbars and floating menus excluded).
* Letting these miniature windows represent the actual file, so that I can attach a miniaturized window (the file) to an e-mail by drag'n'dropping it.

Extending the integration above to bridge the gap between multiple representations of the file system, by:
* Letting every open application/document be represented by a large, prominent proxy icon (a miniaturized version of the application/document). Drag this icon to the location where you want to save the document. Drag files onto this icon to hand them over to the application/document (import, open, place).
This part may sound a bit vague, and it is. The main concept is to bridge abstractions of documents into the file manager. I haven't sorted out the details yet.

Integrate iChat into the Finder.
Let contacts be represented by Finder icons, and thus located accordingly:
* Project Alfa members in the Project Alfa folder.
* Friends and family on the desktop.
* Ex-girlfriends in the trash.
E-mail or mess files by dragging files onto the icon.
Create multi-chats by dragging buddy-icons into existing chats. (That's how it works already? I'm no iChat user.)


There's so much more, but I'll spare you.. :>

[TETENAL]

What the **** does FTFF mean?

[OreoCookie]

Fix The Fracking Finder. Used in the 10.5 wishlist a lot without really specifying what people wanted. So I started this thread

[OreoCookie]

Originally Posted by cla

I wouldn't then have to wrestle the concept of multiple representations of songs: The one in iTunes is the one. Since iTunes would be "just another Finder window", I could for instance drag songs from iTunes into e-mail messages for attaching.
Something I can't today.

Interesting point. There is some limited drag and drop functionality in iTunes. You can copy several songs from iTunes to various Finder windows. I'm surprised dragging them directly to a Mail window doesn't work.

[Weyland-Yutani]

Great post cla

@OreoCookie

FTFF means many things to many people *except* for one thing: that Apple puts *some* or even *immense* effort into developing the Finder. As I wrote above, the Finder is largely unchanged since the original release of OS X. It has been in maintainance mode with modest upgrades (such as labels and brushed metal look) but considering how immense progress we've seen in the rest of the system, Finder development has been at a standstill for 4 years.

cheers

W-Y

[chris v]

Networking, or lack thereof, gets on my nerves more than anything, followed by the quirks of moving columns, like when you go to select a file, and the whole column moves on you before you can finnish double-clicking it, as it attempts to display the preview column.

[OreoCookie]

Originally Posted by Weyland-Yutani

Great post cla

@OreoCookie

FTFF means many things to many people *except* for one thing: that Apple puts *some* or even *immense* effort into developing the Finder. As I wrote above, the Finder is largely unchanged since the original release of OS X. It has been in maintainance mode with modest upgrades (such as labels and brushed metal look) but considering how immense progress we've seen in the rest of the system, Finder development has been at a standstill for 4 years.

cheers

W-Y

Apparently you misunderstood. I don't want an explanation what FTFF means, I want a discussion with posts similar to cla's. No bitching, constructive posts with things you would like to see in the next version.

PS I'll change the thread title to make that clearer.

[Weyland-Yutani]

Originally Posted by OreoCookie

Apparently you misunderstood. I don't want an explanation what FTFF means, I want a discussion with posts similar to cla's. No bitching, constructive posts with things you would like to see in the next version.

PS I'll change the thread title to make that clearer.

"For all people who want Apple to FTFF: what do you mean?"

as you wrote in the first post and was reflected in the title of this thread.

I don't see the point of having another "what do you want to see in 10.5" thread, do you?

cheers

W-Y

[mAxximo]

MIllenium,

“FTFF” is already public domain and you'll see it all over the internet, regardless of who came up with it first. Your intent on disqualifying all of those behind this “crusade” by saying that all we just want is the Mac Finder back is...well...lame.

I'll post what I'd like to see fixed in 10.5 later today.

[Big Mac]

Oreo wants people to precisely explain what parts of the Finder they want fixed so that it won't be so broken in their eyes. If people use precise terms, at least we'll be in the same ballpark when discussing the matter. I think it's a valid thread.

Tiger's Finder seems pretty functional to me; as I've said before it has been less annoying than previous versions. But there remains significant room for improvement:

*Things would be so much better if Apple would finally relent to our perennial demand for separation between browser and spatial modes, since it's still the most annoying aspect of the OS X Finder. But we all know that's just not in the cards realistically.

*Finder multithreading and abstraction, especially for networking, still has a long way to go. The Finder should be pretty close to rock solid, but it is not yet.

*The Finder still has problems at certain times handling chown and chmod through Get Info. And while I'm on that subject I think Apple could simplify things by reducing the number of users and groups displayed directly in that menu, since there are a ton; they're not very user-friendly looking.

*Beefier contextual menu contents: Why do they still lack icon clean up?

[Horsepoo!!!]

User-definable (and predefined/default) metadata tags that allow finding/categorizing applications easily.



Document sub-types (which exist as of today), followed by kind for further refinement.



Folder grouping and smart-folders to group files you want to keep together or that all serve a certain purpose.



Pardon my french, W-T and mAxximo, but **** spatiality. If it makes you feel better though, you'd be able to create folders and put stuff in them...although they'd live in the sidebar and would by no means represent a physical location...they'd simply group files that may not have common keywords or Smart Folder criteria that can group them together

Further refinements to the mockup will come when I got more time. :/

Keep in mind the Finder is an all-purpose file browser and shouldn't go into metadata details like dedicated apps like iTunes, Mail, Address Book, iPhoto...although some level of detail should be available, they shouldn't be the Finder's main focus and should be hidden to average users. It should however keep people's projects organized and allow easy backup to various storage media attached to the computer and the network.

And what the hey, the new Finder should have a shelf (which should actually be a drawer), for the win!!11

[Big Mac]

Interesting points and nice mockups, Horsepoo. However, I do not think people are ready for such a radical departure for the Finder - an iTunes Finder if you wish to call it that. There should be a greater emphasis on metadata, but the Finder also need to remain, fundamentally, the Finder.

[Horsepoo!!!]

Originally Posted by Big Mac

Interesting points and nice mockups, Horsepoo. However, I do not think people are ready for such a radical departure for the Finder - an iTunes Finder if you wish to call it that. There should be a greater emphasis on metadata, but the Finder also need to remain, fundamentally, the Finder.

You don't think people are sufficiently proficient with iTunes to apply this new browsing concept to the Finder? I don't actually remember but did a lot of people complain about iTunes' browsing method?

People asked for a metadata-rich OS and now that it's finally upon us we're going to stay with the old Finder concept which doesn't particularly care for any metadata but 'file path' (which, IMO, is a useless piece of metadata to anyone but the person who remembers this path)?

[Big Mac]

Originally Posted by Horsepoo!!!

You don't think people are sufficiently proficient with iTunes to apply this new browsing concept to the Finder? I don't actually remember but did a lot of people complain about iTunes' browsing method?

People asked for a metadata-rich OS and now that it's finally upon us we're going to stay with the old Finder concept which doesn't particularly care for any metadata but 'file path' (which, IMO, is a useless piece of metadata to anyone but the person who remembers this path)?

I see where you're going, but I honestly do not believe people wish to have an iTunes Finder. Not right now, at least. It would be an interesting proof of concept for someone to make one up. But metadata at the filesystem level remains too new, and there just is not enough of it available to make it really useful as a replacement for the Finder, IMO. Music works really well in a metadata browser like iTunes because it has a series of metadata tags. Photos also work, although to a lesser extent. Average files, however, do not have a lot of metadata that are useful to the user. Even BeOS, which had the most advanced form of metadata at the filesystem level, did not do away with paths.

[Horsepoo!!!]

Originally Posted by Big Mac

I see where you're going, but I honestly do not believe people wish to have an iTunes Finder. Not right now, at least. It would be an interesting proof of concept for someone to make one up. But metadata at the filesystem level remains too new, and there just is not enough of it available to make it really useful as a replacement for the Finder, IMO. Music works really well in a metadata browser like iTunes because it has a series of metadata tags. Photos also work, although to a lesser extent. Average files, however, do not have a lot of metadata that are useful to the user. Even BeOS, which had the most advanced form of metadata at the filesystem level, did not do away with paths.

That's why the transition will take time...and that's why the Finder isn't being 'fixed'. Apple introduced Spotlight, now developers have 2 years to make sure their apps produce files with useful metadata or allow the user to tag keywords to them (or worse comes to worst, the OS X Save dialog should let the user do that). The metadata available now for files isn't as bad as you say it is. The only files that are difficult to tag usefully are image/photo files.

[alphasubzero949]

The following cosmetic issues in Tiger should be addressed in Leopard:

1. The toolbar icons available do NOT match the buttons in the default set.
2. The folder labels are missing in the sidebar.
3. The available HD space does not always update on the fly.
4. Network (in the sidebar) often has an eject icon next to it.

[reader50]

Let the user put Trash Can on Desktop again. So it has a consistent location, and when I drag things there, there will be something to let go on.

Activate FTP upload. Since any browser can mount FTP volumes for reading, having read-only access is useless.

When setting the background for a window, give the user a tile option. This could be called a pattern option. I like something more than a solid color, but the only option is Picture. Since windows can scale to any size, you need a thumping big picture for it not to "run out" and go to white on long windows. I'm using a parchment background picture, btw. Currently 1200 x 3000, I should increase that.

I don't like the sidebar because using it "roots" the column view at that point. You can't scroll back to show all the drives. I fixed it by making new windows open to "Computer" and removing all the items that appear in the sidebar. So this should make the sidebar vanish/close, and all column views can scroll back to Computer like they did in Jag, right? Wrong, it does scroll back to Computer. But the sidebar is still there, just a little bit open. You have to manually finish closing it on each window for the finder to remember to leave the empty sidebar closed.

I'd like a user pref to allow a regular (non-spotlight) find from Finder windows. So you can search for particular files, resort them by modification date or size, and do stuff with them. Instead, Spotlight turns the Finder window into a Results window that doesn't sort. Also, Spotlight is useless for finding stuff that needs finding. I already *know* where all my documents are in my home folder, since I was the one who put every one of them there. But when I'm trying to find stuff in the *nix folders, Spotlight doesn't even index those folders. Try to find php.ini, the PHP config file. Apple's default install puts it in /private/etc, other installs put it in /usr/local/lib. But Spotlight doesn't have an option to include extra folders, only to exclude more folders. Put the user in control instead of lying to us, like Spotlight does. "No files were found".

A user pref to turn off change-extension warnings. Whenever I rename stuff and it has an extension, I get that stupid warning. Holding down Option while hitting Return on the name change doesn't avoid the warning dialog. There is no checkbox to "Stop Warning Me" - it's like the QT Pro dialog or the Energizer Bunny. Just keeps coming back. Enough already, I know what I'm doing and this isn't supposed to be a Simple Finder. Alternatively, offer a Simple/Regular/Advanced Finder choice, where the Advanced assumes the user is a pro and turns the warnings off.

More user control of when a Preview appears in column view. It's ok for JPEGs and other documents, but stupid for video files. Who is going to watch any video file in a Finder thumnail? And it's really stupid if the file is an xvid or divx format video. The Finder beachballs while QT reads the whole file, then QT has to contact the Apple servers looking for a codec. Since it never finds one, and never will, it keeps trying on every preview. In about 30 seconds, it finally shows a blank preview with a slider control. It gets even better if you aren't connected to the internet at the time, then you sometimes get a dialog box. This is really a QT problem, but the Finder could take control here. Give a list of file types that don't get automatically previewed. Should be useful for other situations too, like large PDF documents.

Let me move locked files. At least, to the Trash if nowhere else. Locks are to prevent deletion or modification. But whenever I drag a locked file to the trash, I have to manually unlock it first. This gets frustrating around the 20th time. Let the Trash complain that it's a locked file, and you can turn the complaints off by option-emptying the Trash. But at least let me move the file.

[JKT]

Originally Posted by reader50

More user control of when a Preview appears in column view. It's ok for JPEGs and other documents, but stupid for video files. Who is going to watch any video file in a Finder thumnail?

While I'm not going to argue with having more intelligent previewing, I am one person who watches the film previews in the Finder all the time. Why launch Quicktime for a file when it is already at its maximum size in the Finder preview? (Many clips I watch are low resolution/small dimension files).

[Don Pickett]

Originally Posted by Big Mac

Interesting points and nice mockups, Horsepoo. However, I do not think people are ready for such a radical departure for the Finder - an iTunes Finder if you wish to call it that. There should be a greater emphasis on metadata, but the Finder also need to remain, fundamentally, the Finder.

Have to agree. Those mock ups seem to be the worst of all possible worlds.

It may have been said before, but I think spatiality is dying, largely because of increased volume sizes. Spatial works well on smallish volumes, but on the multi-terabyte servers I have to traverse it's a nightmare. The column view is, for me, the killer app in that department – I can very easily go fifteen levels deep on one window, can can shoot up and down the directories without very little effort. Doing that in a spatial Finder would be a nightmare.

I have never understood the animus with the new Finder. I almost always work in column view. When I need to see a list, it's a very simple Command-2 to get list view. But, like I said, the list/spatial metaphor breaks down when I have to to go Users/me/Documents/foo/bar/foo/bar/foo/bar.

[ogun]

Originally Posted by OreoCookie

For all people who want Apple to FTFF: what do you mean? What improvements would you like to see in future versions of the Finder? Would you want it more like Pathfinder?

(The intention of this thread is to find out what you want to have fixed, not to start yet another flame war.)

Try to keep it civil.

I'd like two main things in the Finder:

1 actual working networking. It pains me when I can connect to my Mac from my WinXP box with less effort than from the other way. Connecting to my iDisk is a major pain, as well. I don't care how they fix networking, so long as it's done.

2 actual working media viewing. I _hate_ the Spinning Pizza Of Doom which shows up when I click on a large video file, a large audio file, or even a large still image. Things have improved. It used to be that I got the SPOD on even small files. There is considerable room for further improvement. Also, if a media file (usually a video file or an audio file) has certain types of problems, clicking on it will _crash the Finder_! That's very bad indeed. True, I see it less and less often now, but I still see it on occasion. And when it happens it's extremely annoying.

I've sent bug reports to Apple on both of the above, and got nothing back. For all I can tell the roports vanished into a Quark-istic black hole. Sigh.

[SMacTech]

Originally Posted by reader50

Let the user put Trash Can on Desktop again. So it has a consistent location, and when I drag things there, there will be something to let go on.

How would a place on the Desktop be consistent? It can be moved anywhere.

My dock is on the right and pinned to the bottom and the Trash is always in a consistent place, without having to close windows, exposé or anything of the sort, I can access the trash can.

But that's not to say I am against an option to place it there, for those who endeavor some OS 9 spatiality.

[Horsepoo!!!]

Spatiality/column view...they're both dying.

File paths are becoming a thing of the past.

First mistake is to think that *all* people are organized and have the time to meticulously construct a hierarchy to store their files. Are people still cataloguing their 5+ gigs of music manually? Or cataloguing their 5000+ photos manually? iChat saved conversations? Mail?

No...because apps have come along to save the day and catalogue them for you. Why can't this concept extend to all files?

Second mistake is to think that *other* people will understand how you constructed your hierarchy and that you did zero mistake in your categorization.

How is it that people can find one specific song out of 2 million on the iTMS? It's not spatial, it's not hierarchical...how do they do it? How do they find a song if they don't know the name of the song, or the artist, or the album, or all 3? To be **** out of luck...you'd have to not know a single part of the name of the song, the artist, album and on top of that, you'd have to have no clue of the genre.

If the only way to navigate the iTMS would be spatially or by column, people would be pulling their hair out and Apple wouldn't the king of the music distribution industry.

Home computers are getting networked...office computers are mostly all networked...accessing those files today requires you to know the paths to them or requires you to dig for them. Is this how it's supposed to be? Is accessing files on the network doomed to be user-unfriendly?

No. Spatiality and hierarchical organization has got to go.

[Weyland-Yutani]

While I am still a bit confused why this thread exists, because it has exactly the same purpose as the 10.5 wishlist thread SMacTech reminded me of a thing I'd like to see.

Trashcan in the sidebar (as well as an option to put it on the Desktop). A sidebar Trash is always within easy reach and visible when you use the brushed metal windows. Even when the Dock (and Trash) are hidden.

There is a freeware app that does pretty much this (I forget what it is called because I renamed it on my machine ) but it emulates a Trash and you can put it wherever you like. That seems like a nice Finder feature for future versions!

cheers

W-Y

[SMacTech]

Originally Posted by Weyland-Yutani

While I am still a bit confused why this thread exists, because it has exactly the same purpose as the 10.5 wishlist

Me too, confused, as always. But it keeps the posters coming back, eh?

I like the trash can in the side bar idea. How hard could it be for Apple to add it? It is a long way across my ACD screen to drag a file to the lower right corner. That's when I have to switch to keyboard mode to delete files.

[cla]

Originally Posted by Horsepoo!!!

Spatiality/column view...they're both dying.

File paths are becoming a thing of the past.

No offence, but a post that sounds kind of like the narrator of Lord of the Rings needs either a) backing up with scientific evidence, or b) a clear statement that this is the author's personal assumptions, although inspired from whatever.

First mistake is to think that *all* people are organized and have the time to meticulously construct a hierarchy to store their files.

Second mistake is to think that *all* people are unorganized and have to handle more than 100 files. Why bother them with meta data every time they save something? Having to enter a file name is bad enough.

Most persons posting here not only work with computers all day long, but do stuff on levels "normal" users never would. Should the Fixed Finder be for us, or for the masses?

I get your meta data arguments HorsePoo, and as far as handling *unorganised* data is concerned, I follow. Nevertheless, what about data as a result of a creative process (a couple of images, text clippings, fonts and icc profiles)...

Images dragged off the web right into the "typography inspiration" folder get organized right away, for these images truly are my "~cla/leech/web/typographic inspiration".

Perhaps meta data can accomplish that by some smart tagging ui, but not in the next three years (for this was the time quantum in which you declared the Finder as we know it would be dead).

[cla]

Oh, and do fix these two school-book examples of plain, bad user interface design:

Example 1 (H.264) – What purpose do these pixels serve, other than to frustrate?

Example 2 (H.264) - This happens a couple of times a day on a 1,8 GHz G5, 1.25 GB ram.

[Horsepoo!!!]

Originally Posted by cla

Second mistake is to think that *all* people are unorganized and have to handle more than 100 files. Why bother them with meta data every time they save something? Having to enter a file name is bad enough.

Wow...if entering a file name is bad enough then placing it in a hierarchy of folders which you probably had to create must bring excruciating mental anguish.

Most persons posting here not only work with computers all day long, but do stuff on levels "normal" users never would. Should the Fixed Finder be for us, or for the masses?

I get your meta data arguments HorsePoo, and as far as handling *unorganised* data is concerned, I follow. Nevertheless, what about data as a result of a creative process (a couple of images, text clippings, fonts and icc profiles)...

Images dragged off the web right into the "typography inspiration" folder get organized right away, for these images truly are my "~cla/leech/web/typographic inspiration".

Perhaps meta data can accomplish that by some smart tagging ui, but not in the next three years (for this was the time quantum in which you declared the Finder as we know it would be dead).

Why the hell not? It's gotta start somewhere. Windows Vista is going to take metadata very seriously. I'd hate for Apple to be 'behind the times' when Vista hits the streets.

Sure, old files may not have very much metadata but tags nowadays get tagged with useful metadata...

If entering a file name and choosing a location to save the file isn't a problem, then certainly tagging the file with a few keywords won't be...and if you're too lazy to even do that, the file will still get tagged with enough metadata for you to find it without much difficulty (if you don't have very many files.)

[Big Mac]

Originally Posted by Don Pickett

Have to agree. Those mock ups seem to be the worst of all possible worlds.

It may have been said before, but I think spatiality is dying, largely because of increased volume sizes. Spatial works well on smallish volumes, but on the multi-terabyte servers I have to traverse it's a nightmare. The column view is, for me, the killer app in that department – I can very easily go fifteen levels deep on one window, can can shoot up and down the directories without very little effort. . .

The humorous point is that Horsepoo, in arguing for his metadata Finder, lumped the spatial view and column browsing together, almost as if they are one in the same.

Originally Posted by Horsepoo!!

Why the hell not? It's gotta start somewhere. Windows Vista is going to take metadata very seriously. I'd hate for Apple to be 'behind the times' when Vista hits the streets.

What makes you think M$ is going to do anything that is both new and functional with metadata? Are you saying Vista has elements similar to your mockup? If so, I'll certainly have to check that out.

[leperkuhn]

I would like to see the current path in the bar at the bottom. Click any part of the path to be instantly brought there.

I'd also like to see the unified look replace the brushed metal.

The unified metal to me is more functional because it doesn't have the HUGE edges. iCal has about 40 pixels of wasted space, when a 1 pixel line separator will do. I realize it's not a big deal with one window, but it's a pain in the ass when i have a bunch open and I'm trying to actually get something done.

Definiately more spotlight control. I want everything indexed. It's a little annoying to have to use "locate" or another unix tool to find something, when there's a find already built into the OS.

Comments box in save dialogs, please. Who wants to save something, then look for it in the finder and put comments in it? (not really finder, but related)

Contextual menu's need improvement. Arrange By -> Whatever needs to be there.

Create new File -> types would also be nice. I've added it myself using contextual menu workshop. Navigating back to bbedit, creating a new file, and saving somewhere is dumb when I'm already there.

[cla]

Originally Posted by Horsepoo!!!

If entering a file name and choosing a location to save the file isn't a problem, then certainly tagging the file with a few keywords won't be...

Chances are that "choosing a location" becomes just as cumbersome in the case of meta data: I imagine you visualize this process of tagging files being done in free-text. Apart from a vast percentage of the population being dyslectic, you'd be surprised how many people fail to type their e-mail address correctly.

Furthermore, is the alpha project spelled "alpha" or "alfa"? Unless of course the computer requests the user to verify each before unseen tag — probably a quite intrusive user experience.

Another option would be for the user to save and brand a file by simply dragging it onto a predefined area. The "alpha" area. Accessing this area would then bring up all files in the system ever to be dragged to and tagged by the alpha area. This is in fact a spatial solution.

The general crux is to encapsulate files into groups, and selecting tags is what remains — "choosing a location".

Don't get me wrong — I've got about 24 gigs of stock art on my hard drive. If the image formats (the Achilles' heel of meta data) AND its applications would support and preserve tags, I'd be the first to go weeh. I've also got 5 gigs of mp3's which I wouldn't dream of browsing in the Finder.

My main concern is that every time "spatial" is mentioned, people tend to think files and folders. Nested hierarchies, browsed at one or a couple of levels at a time. Interesting applications taking other approaches, zoomable user interfaces for instance, are seldom mentioned. These have been successfully implemented and a success in user-testing.

[cla]

Originally Posted by reader50

...stupid for video files. Who is going to watch any video file in a Finder thumnail? And it's really stupid if the file is an xvid or divx format video. The Finder beachballs while QT reads the whole file, then QT has to contact the Apple servers looking for a codec. Since it never finds one, and never will, it keeps trying on every preview. In about 30 seconds, it finally shows a blank preview with a slider control. It gets even better if you aren't connected to the internet at the time, then you sometimes get a dialog box. This is really...

Heh, I actally lolled in recognition when I read this... =]

[cla]

Originally Posted by leperkuhn

Create new File -> types would also be nice. I've added it myself using contextual menu workshop. Navigating back to bbedit, creating a new file, and saving somewhere is dumb when I'm already there.

Document-oriented... Application-oriented... Document-oriented... Application-oriented... I think you're quite right it's dumb. Although dynamic content in contextual menus rhymes bad with my vision of the Finder radial context menu, so... can you please come up with another solution? =]

Good points b t w.

[Horsepoo!!!]

Originally Posted by cla

Chances are that "choosing a location" becomes just as cumbersome in the case of meta data: I imagine you visualize this process of tagging files being done in free-text. Apart from a vast percentage of the population being dyslectic, you'd be surprised how many people fail to type their e-mail address correctly.

Sure...if we're restricting ourselves to 'typed' keywords. If dyslexia is such a big concern, these people can speak the keywords. Hopefully Apple will do something about it's 15 year old speech recognition software and make it more useful.

Furthermore, is the alpha project spelled "alpha" or "alfa"? Unless of course the computer requests the user to verify each before unseen tag — probably a quite intrusive user experience.

Well it depends on how you view auto-completion or spell-check features in web browsers or Cocoa apps...if they're intrusive then again, Apple should do something about its speech software.

Another option would be for the user to save and brand a file by simply dragging it onto a predefined area. The "alpha" area. Accessing this area would then bring up all files in the system ever to be dragged to and tagged by the alpha area. This is in fact a spatial solution.

Sure...or tag files using predefined keywords. It's up to Apple to make the tagging easy and fun...I don't know why you suddenly assumed these keywords would have to be typed in. If you can find a post of mine in this thread that even mentions metadata being typed in, please bring it to my attention.

The general crux is to encapsulate files into groups, and selecting tags is what remains — "choosing a location".

True...but you're not limited to a single location (the file path) which is one basis of spatiality and hierarchy.

Don't get me wrong — I've got about 24 gigs of stock art on my hard drive. If the image formats (the Achilles' heel of meta data) AND its applications would support and preserve tags, I'd be the first to go weeh. I've also got 5 gigs of mp3's which I wouldn't dream of browsing in the Finder.

Well, automatic tagging of image files will be a difficult challenge to programmers. I realize that right now it's easier to just save the file into a location...but if people took the time to tag their image files with a few pertinent keywords, it would be much easier to find it again amongst 24 gigs. The problem lies in the fact that those 24 gigs aren't tagged...and I suppose you'll never want to tag them.

The current Finder probably will have to remain for another 5-6 years simply to accommodate all the old files with little to no metadata on them. But it will be replaced one day. I think Apple will deliberately make the Finder a sucky experience for everyone as it slowly transitions us to Spotlight.

[Horsepoo!!!]

Originally Posted by Big Mac

The humorous point is that Horsepoo, in arguing for his metadata Finder, lumped the spatial view and column browsing together, almost as if they are one in the same.

The thing they share in common is the hierarchy-based organization. Someone messy and with no organization skill can lose his files easily in such a system (if he organizes his files badly or if he just dumps everything onto his desktop or Document folder.)

Metadata-based organization allows both the unorganized and the organized to find files easily. The organized person will tag extra keywords to his files instead of creating nested-folders. The messy person will simply save the file and the app will have tagged the file with enough metadata to make it possible for this person to find his file with ease.

[Brass]

Originally Posted by Horsepoo!!!

Spatiality/column view...they're both dying.

File paths are becoming a thing of the past.

First mistake is to think that *all* people are organized and have the time to meticulously construct a hierarchy to store their files. Are people still cataloguing their 5+ gigs of music manually? Or cataloguing their 5000+ photos manually? iChat saved conversations? Mail?

No...because apps have come along to save the day and catalogue them for you. Why can't this concept extend to all files?

Second mistake is to think that *other* people will understand how you constructed your hierarchy and that you did zero mistake in your categorization.

How is it that people can find one specific song out of 2 million on the iTMS? It's not spatial, it's not hierarchical...how do they do it? How do they find a song if they don't know the name of the song, or the artist, or the album, or all 3? To be **** out of luck...you'd have to not know a single part of the name of the song, the artist, album and on top of that, you'd have to have no clue of the genre.

If the only way to navigate the iTMS would be spatially or by column, people would be pulling their hair out and Apple wouldn't the king of the music distribution industry.

Home computers are getting networked...office computers are mostly all networked...accessing those files today requires you to know the paths to them or requires you to dig for them. Is this how it's supposed to be? Is accessing files on the network doomed to be user-unfriendly?

No. Spatiality and hierarchical organization has got to go.

While I agree that in some circumstances, hierarchical organisation is not the easiest way to find things, saying that it has to go is ridiculous.

Hierarchical organisation of files is required for several reasons, not least of which is that many people think that way. Just because you do not, doesn't mean that it has to go. Providing options to do things other ways is good, but to limit the options to only what YOU want is crazy.

I bet the iTunes music store IS hierachically organised behind the scenes - or at least the source for it is. Just not from the end-user's point of view. So it needs two interfaces. One for the customers and one for the administrators. I be the admins have some sort of hierarchical access.

Some files/processes/systems just logically lend themselves to heirarchcial organsiation. While leaving iTunes to organise all my music files, there's no way I'd want Pages to manage how I organise all my .pages files; or Keynote to organise all my .key files. I organise them according to projects, and I like to do this hierarchically. You may like to do things differently, but please don't tell us that your way is A-OK and my way has to go.

[Brass]

I'd like to see the Column view and List view combined. Ie, each column should be able to contain all the list elements (Name, Date, etc). By default, the column would be only wide enough to see the name, but could be made wider to see the other items. If the column was made so wide as to take up the entire window, then you've effectively got the list view as it appears now.

To take full advantage of this, there would probably have to be an additional scroll bar at the bottom of each column, and that would probably look rather ugly.

However, this would remove the need for 3 different types of Finder view, and reduce it to just 2: Heirarchical (Column/List) and Spatial. As others have said, these two views really should be used in completely seperate sets of Windows, and should not be able to convert one into the other (but should be able to open one from the other using some modifier key, and double-click).

[OreoCookie]

Originally Posted by Weyland-Yutani

"For all people who want Apple to FTFF: what do you mean?"

as you wrote in the first post and was reflected in the title of this thread.

I don't see the point of having another "what do you want to see in 10.5" thread, do you?

cheers

W-Y

Yes, but I do. That's why I wrote, I want explanations, not platitudes.

[JLL]

Originally Posted by SMacTech

Me too, confused, as always. But it keeps the posters coming back, eh?

I like the trash can in the side bar idea. How hard could it be for Apple to add it? It is a long way across my ACD screen to drag a file to the lower right corner. That's when I have to switch to keyboard mode to delete files.

Right click -> Move to Trash

[leperkuhn]

I'd like the searching in the finder to be activated by pressing return instead of searching automatically, since the performance isn't even close to what apple claims it is on my dual ghz g4.

[OreoCookie]

Originally Posted by cla

Chances are that "choosing a location" becomes just as cumbersome in the case of meta data: I imagine you visualize this process of tagging files being done in free-text. Apart from a vast percentage of the population being dyslectic, you'd be surprised how many people fail to type their e-mail address correctly.

Well, I don't think this would be too much of a problem if you'd make it (i) optional and (ii) overcome the filling-in problem. Autofill would certainly be an option (works well in iViewMedia Pro). Another one would be to offer a project drop down menu for instance which would offer certain presets, e. g. a suggested location (starting point of the project), suggested fields, etc.

In order to make it non-intrusive, Apple could make it optional.

[OreoCookie]

Originally Posted by Big Mac

What makes you think M$ is going to do anything that is both new and functional with metadata? Are you saying Vista has elements similar to your mockup? If so, I'll certainly have to check that out.

JFYI, WinFS (which is not part of Windows Vista anymore, but will be an addon) has that feature. Paul Thurrot explains how the network scenario is explicitly covered with WinFS -- additional files will `appear' if supplied by a network share, for instance.

[lookmark]

Originally Posted by Millennium

What they want is the OS9 Finder. Most people who actually use the FTFF abbreviation are quite open about this, seeing as it's a 100% Thalo-original term.

I am not trying to pass judgment on whether or not this is a valid concern, merely pointing out that FTFF and BBF9 ("Bring Back Finder 9") are basically interchangeable.

Well... I think the FTFF has become a more universally accepted and (unfortunately) also somewhat umbrella term for everyone who's unhappy about the the relative lack of attention Apple has paid to the Finder.

The big problem with FTFF (the term) for me is how it seems to cover people who basically like the Finder's design but are anything from annoyed to infuriated by bugs that slowly (if ever) get fixed and *also* covers those who feel that the Finder's design is essentially broken (i.e, Siracsua et al, who want browser-based and spatial navigation separated like oil and water). These two camps don't actually have too much in common, but FTFF!!!!! makes it seem like they agree.

Pesonally, I'm in the first camp. I think the Finder's design is pretty good -- column view and the rooted Sidebar are the cat's meow, and despite occasional hiccups, I *like* being able to toggle from browser to spatial view, and do it quite regularly for certain folders. If there's a better way, I'm all for it, but the option suits me. However, some of the Finder bugs are just plain exasperating, and go on version after version of the OS, when they should be fixed in .x.x releases. Spotlight is still kind of clunkily integrated, and could use some love. And so on.

So FTFF. Other than a few small additions from my own list, e.g.

- a refreshed look a la more differentiated source lists in iTunes 5 and Mail 2
- Smart (or at least savable) view options (revamp View Options completely, Apple!)
- ability to quickly "tag" items with metadata (no, Spotlight Comments doesn't quite cut it)
- a much more obvious way to offer a slideshow of images, icon previews of PDFs, etc...

I think the Leopard Finder should introduce a (much more) flexible and powerful plug-in system than what's currently in place -- so all the people out there disappointed with the Finder *design* can introduce something better. I'm intrigued by some arguments out there but I'd like to see action instead of words.

Automator Finder plug-ins are an interesting step in this direction... I'd like see a further step.