[Chuckit]

Originally posted by The DJ:
Well that works, but you cannot seriously call that application easier can you?

Easier than messing around with account creation and Netinfo? I certainly can.

[Andrew Stephens]

Not to mention machines dropping off hte network at random because thee user preferences has reset themselves AGAIN! (and again and again). Or some distinctly iffy networking

[wadesworld]

Originally posted by Andrew Stephens:
Not to mention machines dropping off hte network at random because thee user preferences has reset themselves AGAIN! (and again and again). Or some distinctly iffy networking

As opposed to the Windows support in OS 9? Oh wait, there was none.

Wade

[Twilly Spree]

Originally posted by Chuckit:
Have you ever felt like you had a fairy godmother?

Nice! That's a feature that I feel is missing from OS X now that you mention it.

Oh and make the spacial Finder really spacial. Hey Steve, spacial Finder was more than just being a window janitor!

[Chuckit]

Originally posted by Twilly Spree:
Oh and make the spacial Finder really spacial. Hey Steve, spacial Finder was more than just being a window janitor!

Wha? Finder isn't spatial in Mac OS X. (And I'm not sure what that bit about janitors was.)

[voodoo]

Originally posted by Chuckit:
Wha? Finder isn't spatial in Mac OS X. (And I'm not sure what that bit about janitors was.)

I don't know where you were when OS X was maturing into the initial 10.0 release, but in the public beta Finder windows opened as browsers so all your navigation was contained in that one window.

http://www.starkis.com.au/macosx/

Pretty much as the default is today (only column view available) but this was met with forceful protests from Mac users - powerful enough to make Steve come up on stage and tell people that icon and list view would be in the final release and the option to navigate in a similar way as in OS 9 (when opening a folder opens a window showing the contents of that folder).

Jobs compared the process of closing windows you were browsing through the hierarchy like being a janitor 'cleaning' up your desktop when introducing that option in OS X.

You can achieve it by pressing the oval button in the upper right hand corner of Finder windows. Then you enter spatial mode. Almost. It does everything except two things. It still allows one item to be displayed in two windows (although when in this mode such a situation is far less likely to happen) and it sure doesn't remember window positions or sizes. Even so that MOST CERTAINLY is a spatial mode in the Finder.

Case in point: Yes, the Finder in OS X *is* spacial if choose so, but it is not by default. The spatial metaphor in the OS X Finder is not as good as many (myself included) would like to see it. There are fundamental and distrubing things broken in the spatial model.

My instinct tells me you're just trolling, but I'll give you the benefit of the doubt. Maybe you just didn't know the Finder had a spatial mode.

[leperkuhn]

Originally posted by voodoo:
I don't know where you were when OS X was maturing into the initial 10.0 release, but in the public beta Finder windows opened as browsers so all your navigation was contained in that one window.

http://www.starkis.com.au/macosx/

Pretty much as the default is today (only column view available) but this was met with forceful protests from Mac users - powerful enough to make Steve come up on stage and tell people that icon and list view would be in the final release and the option to navigate in a similar way as in OS 9 (when opening a folder opens a window showing the contents of that folder).

Jobs compared the process of closing windows you were browsing through the hierarchy like being a janitor 'cleaning' up your desktop when introducing that option in OS X.

You can achieve it by pressing the oval button in the upper right hand corner of Finder windows. Then you enter spatial mode. Almost. It does everything except two things. It still allows one item to be displayed in two windows (although when in this mode such a situation is far less likely to happen) and it sure doesn't remember window positions or sizes. Even so that MOST CERTAINLY is a spatial mode in the Finder.

Case in point: Yes, the Finder in OS X *is* spacial if choose so, but it is not by default. The spatial metaphor in the OS X Finder is not as good as many (myself included) would like to see it. There are fundamental and distrubing things broken in the spatial model.

My instinct tells me you're just trolling, but I'll give you the benefit of the doubt. Maybe you just didn't know the Finder had a spatial mode.

I don't think Jobs claimed it was spacial. Ever. It just makes the window open new windows.

[lookmark]

Spacial isn't like an on-off switch, folks. It's a collection of factors. The Classic Finder was almost entirely spacial, with a pervasive 1-to-1 window-to-folder relationship (except that pesky List view, eh? ); the OS X Finder is an acceptable if occ. vexed combination of primarily-browser-based with a (somewhat half-hearted) mostly spacial mode as an option.

Close enough for most folks, IMO, but the weary hardcore spacialites and a few graybeards seem to disagree.

I'm puzzled why the UI team couldn't go extra yard to make the spatial option just a little better (not allowing two views of the same folder open at the same time in non-browser mode, an option to "never open window with toolbar", etc). But I use column view 80% of the time, and so do most people around me, so I can't get too worked up about it.

[typoon]

Originally posted by PSST:

What about if there are disk troubles?

I don't want to have to know command line Unix just to fix something... Especially terminal...

Plus, I understand loging in, is secure for X and 9, I do it now, but once, I had a root and admin account mix up between the two so badly, that I had to reformat a 60 GB imac and start over..... and I said goodbye to OS X...

Um, Disk warrior exists for OS X no need to use the unix command line. also TechTool Pro does a decent Job.

That is why root user is NOT enabled by defualt on OS X. So people CAN't do that. If you had root user enabled and you mixed it up I would say that there was a PEBKAC (Problem Exists Between Keyboard and Chair) error. So that problem was your own fault. Not the design of OS X.

[voodoo]

Originally posted by leperkuhn:
I don't think Jobs claimed it was spacial. Ever. It just makes the window open new windows.

Jobs didn't 'claim' anything about the Finder being spatial or not. What has that got to do with anything??

You are clueless about this issue obviously, so why are you even bothering to reply?

Originally posted by lookmark:

Spacial isn't like an on-off switch, folks. It's a collection of factors.

In OS X it is an on/off switch. The Finder behaves a lot different when you push the button in the upper right corner. The Finder will then behave in almost every fundamental way in a spatial way. Except it ignores the cornerstone of spatial behavior. Namely that no item can be seen in more than one window at ANY given time.

Other than that, yes the Finder in 10.3 is spatial.

Does the Finder:

� Open windows for every folder you open (even if other modes are available)? - Yes
� Give you a Desktop that acts like an open place where you can put things items (even if it's just a folder in ~/)? - Yes
� Have icon view (even if other view modes are available)? - Yes
� Show volumes mounted on the Desktop (even if they are in /Volumes/ in 'reality')? - Yes
� Moving and copying items is made by draging them (even if copy/paste is an option)
� Allow coloring of items, i.e. labels (even if you don't have to use them)? - Yes
� etc etc.. I know I'm forgetting many things

But with all these spatial features it is lacking the cornerstone feature: Never allowing the same item in more than one window at *any* given time. Ever.

Finally, I want to ask leperkuhn and others who keep yapping at us who like to see the Finder improved: Do you see any of us patronize you guys if you want to see features added or improved in your column view?? Get a life already.

[lookmark]

Originally posted by voodoo:
In OS X it is an on/off switch. The Finder behaves a lot different when you push the button in the upper right corner. The Finder will then behave in almost every fundamental way in a spatial way. Except it ignores the cornerstone of spatial behavior. Namely that no item can be seen in more than one window at ANY given time.

I wasn't being as clear as I should've been. Yes, in the OS X UI there's a button that toggles browser mode on and off. I'm just saying that spatial is a word that's become a bit fuzzy; all it discusses is the relationship between the visual location of items w/r/t their direct manipulation. In these kinds of discussions it often carries the connotation of this relationship being critical (this is quite subjective of course).

It's not like the Classic Finder was completely spatial (List view wasn't), and OS X is completely non-spatial (even browser mode has spatial elements, and Expos� is highly spatial). But it's clear to me anyway that both the sheer growth of data + browsing the web has had an enormous influence on how users navigate, and the OS X Finder's browser mode has been given more time and thought in OS X.

Originally posted by voodoo:
But with all these spatial features it is lacking the cornerstone feature: Never allowing the same item in more than one window at *any* given time. Ever.

Agreed, although my contention is that it's only "cornerstone" for the people who really, really care about UI and take part in geeky forums like this one. I suspect that a great majority of users are simply not paying attention to these things, and this is why it's fallen to the bottom of Apple's to-do list (if it's there at all).

But I agree with you -- if you're going to include a non-browser "spatial" mode of the Finder, go the whole way, and make sure you can't have two views of the same folder open at the same time if there's no browser window in sight. And, as said before, I think a "never open a window in browser mode" checkbox would be essential for those to long to emulate the Classic Finder's behavior.

[lookmark]

p.s. I find it rather curious that there's been not a single third-party hack or plug-in for the Finder that would add that last option. If there's any demand for a Classic "spatial" Finder, why hasn't anyone done this? Any takers?

[Chuckit]

Originally posted by voodoo:
Jobs didn't 'claim' anything about the Finder being spatial or not. What has that got to do with anything??

Well, either some authoritative source claimed it was spatial or you're putting words in Apple's collective mouth, since you're asserting that it's meant to be spatial.

Put simply, it doesn't seem to be meant as a "spatial" mode. It's just a non-browser mode where folders open in new windows. You haven't offered any reason to believe it's anything more, so complaining about flaws in the spatial mode of the Finder is kind of like complaining about flaws in its 3-D dungeon-browser mode.

[voodoo]

Originally posted by Chuckit:
Well, either some authoritative source claimed it was spatial or you're putting words in Apple's collective mouth, since you're asserting that it's meant to be spatial.

Put simply, it doesn't seem to be meant as a "spatial" mode. It's just a non-browser mode where folders open in new windows. You haven't offered any reason to believe it's anything more, so complaining about flaws in the spatial mode of the Finder is kind of like complaining about flaws in its 3-D dungeon-browser mode.

If it walks like a duck..

go away troll

[alex_wlu_82]

Originally posted by chris v:
I will go to my grave happier if I never have to troubleshoot an extension set again as long as I live.

AMEN!

[hudson1]

I had a simple solution to the Finder issue that stems all the way back to John Siracusa's reviews on Ars Technica... simply don't allow the two metaphors (spatial and browser) to morph from one to another. Double-click a drive icon and get a spatial Finder view such as in OS 9. Single-click the Finder Dock icon and get a column view file browser. All they had to do at that point was remove the toggle switch from the windows and many of the complaints would have been addressed. Not all complaints, obviously, but many if not most of them.

[Chuckit]

Originally posted by voodoo:
If it walks like a duck..

go away troll

Hey, I'm not the one that's been throwing insults around like birdseed, voodoo. I'm just not convinced that the Finder is meant to be spatial. I don't see how that's trolling.

[goMac]

OS 9 was a mess programming wise. If Apple extended the life of it no one would be programming for the Mac anymore. It was hard to code for, and very hard to debug on.

[saddino]

Originally posted by goMac:
OS 9 was a mess programming wise. If Apple extended the life of it no one would be programming for the Mac anymore. It was hard to code for, and very hard to debug on.

If by "hard to code for" you mean the the API space was not as rich as Win32, then perhaps you have a point, but for the most part the fundamentals were there and were documented well enough, with some exceptions (e.g. the data browser, HTMLRenderingLib, etc.).

Now, I agree that pre-System 8, when MPW and MacApp were in vogue and the transition to PPC hadn't been made, Mac programming could be difficult, but by OS 8 and with the advent of CodeWarrior and PowerPlant -- programming Mac applications wasn't that "hard" unless you were supporting legacy code (68K asm, deprecated APIs, etc). And by the time OS 9 came along, programming was a pretty straightforward affair, IMHO.

Now, given the lack of memory protection, I have to agree that debugging was a bitch. But that's what Macsbug and the programmer's switch (!) was there for.

[voodoo]

Originally posted by Chuckit:
Hey, I'm not the one that's been throwing insults around like birdseed, voodoo. I'm just not convinced that the Finder is meant to be spatial. I don't see how that's trolling.

Fair enough, you don't have to be convinced either way. Nevertheless it is trollish when you disregard all the indications of the Finder being spatial or having spatial elements. There is no denying that OS X inherited most of the old Finder of OS 9 in addition to all the things it inherited from NeXT. I regret that the inheritance wasn't complete. I would have liked to she NeXT's shelf and OS 9's spatial mode made complete in OS X. So far the interface elements of the old systems have been trickling in with each major update, i.e. labels, Apple menu, etc so I don't see things like spring-loaded folders, spatial Finder or pop-up folders as something that is never going to happen. I'm sure it will eventually if for no other reason than Apple running out of new ideas for their major system updates and looking to their history for features.

There is strength in a solid OS experience and so far Apple has been improving this in OS X. I think there can be much improved upon yet. The Mac experience is incredible and near perfect in the hardware department, from opening the box and setting up and finally starting your product - but the OS hasn't reflected this eye for detail and thought yet. It is getting there but there are many who think this has been a far slower process than necessary. I look forward to see the Finder in 10.4 and it may well be revolutionary enough (with Spotlight et al) that the it will provide the elegant and solid OS experience I'm hoping for.

The Finder in 10.3 desperately needs the solid vision of the Finder of old, i.e. the illusion of a real functional environment inside the computer.

You said that you doubt the Finder is supposed to be spatial at all. Well, I suppose it all comes down to what you think is 'spatial'. To me it breaks down to 2 things.

1. Navigation withing the file hierarchy *without* ever thinking of it as a path.
2. Consistancy, consitancy, consistancy - because you'll rely more on sense of direction and muscle memory to navigate than memory when navigating.

Column view is simply a graphical metaphor for the CLI path. That's fine by itself and I'm thrilled that is a part of Mac OS X, but I want the spatial metaphor to be there complete as well. Everybody's happy.

PS: I love the Terminal and the power it provides and feel that it is in fact *more* powerful than colum view once you get the hang of it and it is an essential part of the OS. I just don't think that an OS needs to be either/or when it comes to these things. Neither does Apple apparently, but they haven't gone the whole 9 yards with the spatial metaphor in OS X yet. An OS with a complete spatial navigation, CLI, Spotlight and graphical CLI metaphor is quite simply the ultimate OS we can expect. All OS X lacks is the complete spatial navigation to reach the holy grail of OSs.

I think we'll get there eventually.

[CharlesS]

Unfortunately, the spatial metaphor had several major problems:

1. If I accidentally selected the Clean Up menu item (or if some idiot I had to share the computer with did it on purpose), then all of a sudden I would not be able to find the file I wanted without digging around.

2. If I had to use someone else's machine, I would not be able to find the file I wanted without some major digging around.

3. When a folder had a very large number of files in it, it became a major PITA.

[leperkuhn]

Originally posted by saddino:
If by "hard to code for" you mean the the API space was not as rich as Win32, then perhaps you have a point, but for the most part the fundamentals were there and were documented well enough, with some exceptions (e.g. the data browser, HTMLRenderingLib, etc.).

Now, I agree that pre-System 8, when MPW and MacApp were in vogue and the transition to PPC hadn't been made, Mac programming could be difficult, but by OS 8 and with the advent of CodeWarrior and PowerPlant -- programming Mac applications wasn't that "hard" unless you were supporting legacy code (68K asm, deprecated APIs, etc). And by the time OS 9 came along, programming was a pretty straightforward affair, IMHO.

Now, given the lack of memory protection, I have to agree that debugging was a bitch. But that's what Macsbug and the programmer's switch (!) was there for.

Oh come on. Programming for OS 8 was a huge pain in the ass. Using the toolbox was a terrible experience, and getting anything basic done was a huge pain.

Cocoa is leaps and bounds past where OS 7/8/9 was.

[saddino]

Originally posted by leperkuhn:
Oh come on. Programming for OS 8 was a huge pain in the ass. Using the toolbox was a terrible experience, and getting anything basic done was a huge pain.

Yes, which is exactly why being a Mac contract developer in those days could be very lucrative. The $ was worth the "pain" IMHO.

Cocoa is leaps and bounds past where OS 7/8/9 was.

Agreed. And I never said anything to suggest otherwise.

[voodoo]

Stupid forum!!

[voodoo]

... can't handle some characters without pooping itself

[voodoo]

Originally posted by CharlesS:
Unfortunately, the spatial metaphor had several major problems:

1. If I accidentally selected the Clean Up menu item (or if some idiot I had to share the computer with did it on purpose), then all of a sudden I would not be able to find the file I wanted without digging around.

2. If I had to use someone else's machine, I would not be able to find the file I wanted without some major digging around.

3. When a folder had a very large number of files in it, it became a major PITA.

Fortunately the spatial metaphor has no problems when used in combination with the CLI, Spotlight and column view.

As for your problems.. I'm not sure you're laying the blame where it is due.

� problem 1: With Spotlight this isn't an issue assuming the folder in question contains many files. If it doesn't then it doesn't matter how someone rearranges the files in the folder, you'll always be quick finding it in icon view (spatial). Either way you should be quick to find your file by typing in the first letters in the filename. Just Clean Up by name and go.

(BTW OS X has this neat thing called accounts, to prevent people from monkeying around in your files..)

� problem 2: This has to do with the spatial metaphor how? People don't place their things by GUI metaphores AFAIK. I can't say I can find files any better in OS X than OS 9 when using someone else's machine. I'm not sure you know what the spatial metaphor is.

� problem 3: Using colmn view is just as much PITA in folders that contain a huge amount of files. Either CLI or Spotlight can save you there, but this is not something that is only a problem with spatial. For a huge amount of files in a folder you'll always need some kind of a filtering system, preferably with ample metadate to further improve the filtering.

You are gravely mistaken if you think people who favor the spatial metaphor want *only* the spatial metaphor. Oh no, they want the spatial metaphor all right (complete and without any abridgements) in addition to CLI and Spotlight. Column view is redundant for those who want to use spatial but it is nice at times.

It boils down to that the users prefering colum view are getting 100% supported and deature complete column view + CLI + Spotlight which makes one damn complete user experience IF THAT IS WHAT YOU FAVOR.

Those of us who prefer icon view (spatial) are getting a half assed UI + CLI + Spotlight. Granted it beats the competition to pulp (i.e. Windows, GNOME et al) but it is painfully incomplete. It's not like it isn't there - because it most certainly IS there - but it's not all there yet.

Spatial metaphor is quite simply pathless icon view that doesn't show the same item in two seperate windows at the same time AND consitancy throughout the UI. That's it. Nada m�s. We already have icon view and conistancy.. Add the "no item in more than one window at any given time" as a view option in the Finder and presto! Spatial Finder with all the other goodies that make OS X the most powerful and user friendly OS in the world.

[CharlesS]

Originally posted by voodoo:
... can't handle some characters without pooping itself

What characters are you referring to?

Originally posted by voodoo:
� problem 1: With Spotlight this isn't an issue assuming the folder in question contains many files. If it doesn't then it doesn't matter how someone rearranges the files in the folder, you'll always be quick finding it in icon view (spatial). Either way you should be quick to find your file by typing in the first letters in the filename. Just Clean Up by name and go.

So your point basically is - there are two ways of organizing things in the Finder. One can be confusing, but it's okay, because... you can work around it with a search feature.

(BTW OS X has this neat thing called accounts, to prevent people from monkeying around in your files..)

Which doesn't help if you have files you have to share for whatever reason.

� problem 2: This has to do with the spatial metaphor how? People don't place their things by GUI metaphores AFAIK. I can't say I can find files any better in OS X than OS 9 when using someone else's machine. I'm not sure you know what the spatial metaphor is.

Column view == files always arranged by name - if I know the file's name, I know exactly where to find it, without having to resort to using the keyboard.

Icon view == it's great as long as I'm the one using it, and I'm the one that arranged it. Otherwise, I'm either going to have to scan the entire window looking for the file I want, or I'm going to have to use the keyboard. And if I accidentally Clean Up, well, there goes my spatial organization system.

� problem 3: Using colmn view is just as much PITA in folders that contain a huge amount of files.

No it's not, since with column view I know how the files are going to be organized, so I can find the file if I know its name.

I liked the spatial Finder too back in OS 9, but let's face it, after trying column view, it's better.

[voodoo]

Originally posted by CharlesS:
What characters are you referring to?


So your point basically is - there are two ways of organizing things in the Finder. One can be confusing, but it's okay, because... you can work around it with a search feature.


Which doesn't help if you have files you have to share for whatever reason.


Column view == files always arranged by name - if I know the file's name, I know exactly where to find it, without having to resort to using the keyboard.

Icon view == it's great as long as I'm the one using it, and I'm the one that arranged it. Otherwise, I'm either going to have to scan the entire window looking for the file I want, or I'm going to have to use the keyboard. And if I accidentally Clean Up, well, there goes my spatial organization system.


No it's not, since with column view I know how the files are going to be organized, so I can find the file if I know its name.

I liked the spatial Finder too back in OS 9, but let's face it, after trying column view, it's better.

Well I can't very well post the character without the forum pooping itself now can I

It was the degree symbol � - cut off the rest of my post. Twice, no idea why.

As for your remarks.

There is NO WAY - no way - to navigate through a huge number of files without using search filters. I don't care how organized you are, search filters will be quicker, more efficient and designed for the purpose. Column view is just a glorified list view in that regard, except it can't arrange things in any other order than alphabetical. There are so many other ways to organize files and you'll probably find that out whenever you're sharing files for work with others. What I'm saying is no view, not icon, list, column or CLI is efficient for a huge amount of files. Simple as that. CLI comes closest but it can require a lot of keyboard input - while filters such as Spotlight make huge folders a piece of cake.

Look at it this way: Do you use the 'browse' feature or the 'search' feature when finding a song in iTunes... column view vs. spotlight in practice.

Point being, this has nothig to do with spatial vs column view vs CLI - Spotlight pulvarizes them all in this regard, as it is *specifically* designed to do. Naturally.

If you are sharing files/folder other users can't change the way *you* see it. That's a new one on me but hey. You should file that as a bug with Apple, but it has *nothing* to do with spatial view or metaphors.

You know the argument you make against the spatial view not being good because you can mess it all up by accident just doesn't hold water. Spatial view can well be arranged in whatever way you want, alphabetical etc but that has nothing to do with it being *spatial*. You're saying column view is ultimately better because it's always 'locked' in alpabetical listing! Well good for you. But this isn't about which is better. Such a discussion is beyond silly.

You like column view and I like icon view, but I've got a news for you: They are not mutually exclusive and neither one is going anywhere. My suggestion is to make the best of it and use both to their fullest. You seem however quite confused over what the spatial metaphor is all about and I feel it's only right to correct you on things that may be silly in icon view but have NOTHING to do with the spatial model. At all.

I liked the spatial Finder in OS 9 as well, but I don't agree on column view being better - so I usually stick to icon view. Icon view can be used in NON-spatial AND the semi-spatial mode anyway in OS X. That you see icons does NOT equal spatial in any way. Perhaps you should consider what you are opposing so much.

I can't think of a better way to browse the Desktop in combination with my home folder in OS X than with the spatial model (or the closest thing OS X offers today). It is a limited area that is 100% mine, it is never disturbed by anyone except me, it is small enough for me to remember the position of just about any file I've created and saved there.. Spatial is king in the home folder IMO.

For anything outside the home folder I use the search feature or CLI. I can't wait for Spotlight in Tiger. I won't use anything else outside my home folder for sure. Column view just doesn't suit me, I don't think in file paths. I see files and remember their position accordingly, just like I know where I left my jacket, my cigarettes, my keys etc. In the real world there isn't a path from a root to *everything*. This makes a computer heck of a lot easier to use and that is what the spatial metaphor is all about. It has nothing to do with Clean Up options or accidents. Those are just features on top that may or may not be useful..

Spatial view is pretty much already in the 10.3 Finder. It would be great to see it go all the way. It is there to stay anyway it seems, so make it proper I say!

PS: Why the advocates of column view are always trying to slam those who'd like to see a feature complete spatial Finder is beyond me. Like I never really use column view you guys never really have to use spatial view, unless you so desire. It is as if it doesn't even exists when it is off. Hello?

[utidjian]

Originally posted by voodoo:

Spatial metaphor is quite simply pathless icon view that doesn't show the same item in two seperate windows at the same time AND consitancy throughout the UI. That's it. Nada m�s. We already have icon view and conistancy.. Add the "no item in more than one window at any given time" as a view option in the Finder and presto! Spatial Finder with all the other goodies that make OS X the most powerful and user friendly OS in the world.

Are you sure about Gnome? I have all that you describe above in the Gnome file browser called Nautilus. Spatial is the default mode of the file manager in fact. Some people like it and some don't. There is an option to turn it off and just use "browser" mode. But when it is in "spatial" mode it adheres strictly to your definition of what a spatial file manager should be.

The spatial Nautilus has been a feature for about a year now. IIRC most people hated it... or, at least, the ones that didn't like it were very vocal about it.

[wadesworld]

ow, I agree that pre-System 8, when MPW and MacApp were in vogue and the transition to PPC hadn't been made, Mac programming could be difficult, but by OS 8 and with the advent of CodeWarrior and PowerPlant -- programming Mac applications wasn't that "hard" unless you were supporting legacy code (68K asm, deprecated APIs, etc). And by the time OS 9 came along, programming was a pretty straightforward affair, IMHO.

Now, given the lack of memory protection, I have to agree that debugging was a bitch. But that's what Macsbug and the programmer's switch (!) was there for.

Programming for OS 9 was hard and it wasn't just debugging. There's no question that if OS 9 was still our OS that developers would have continued leaving in droves, rather than attracting new developers as OS X has done.

Wade

[saddino]

Originally posted by wadesworld:
Programming for OS 9 was hard and it wasn't just debugging.

If you believe that, then yes, I agree that you believe that you found it hard. And so did others. But many did not really find it so hard -- I worked with many capable Mac programmers in the 90s and none of us considered the platform hard to develop for. I really don't think that's too difficult to imagine. What is "hard" is completely relative. Compared to devising a good, intuitive menu driven UI in curses on a UNIX box, the Macintosh was easy. Especially with PowerPlant.

As for your other point, I completely agree. Certainly Cocoa and Xcode have been good for developers and have done much to bring new developers to the system.

[wadesworld]

That was a bit condescending don't you think? I do have several commercial applications to my credit.

Let me rephrase: programming for OS 9 was a pain in the butt due to the lack of protected memory and preemptive multitasking.

Wade

[CharlesS]

Originally posted by voodoo:
Well I can't very well post the character without the forum pooping itself now can I

It was the degree symbol � - cut off the rest of my post. Twice, no idea why.

Try ° - it'll make ° no matter what the user's text encoding is set to.

There is NO WAY - no way - to navigate through a huge number of files without using search filters.

Isn't that a bit of an overstatement?

I don't care how organized you are, search filters will be quicker, more efficient and designed for the purpose.

Sometimes. If I'm looking for a particular file, certainly. Sometimes, though, I want to browse, and search doesn't do that very well.

Column view is just a glorified list view in that regard, except it can't arrange things in any other order than alphabetical. There are so many other ways to organize files and you'll probably find that out whenever you're sharing files for work with others. What I'm saying is no view, not icon, list, column or CLI is efficient for a huge amount of files. Simple as that. CLI comes closest but it can require a lot of keyboard input - while filters such as Spotlight make huge folders a piece of cake.

Which doesn't have a lot to do with the topic, really, which is the spatial Finder. What are the benefits of it, really? Why should we want this back, other than the fact that John Siracusa says so?

To me, the reason was that I was able to arrange things exactly in such a manner, so I would know exactly where each often-used icon was. But, it was quite fragile and capable of really throwing me if it were disrupted. These days, the only things I use Icon View for are: the Desktop, distributing an app on a disk image (so you can show off its spiffy icon in the window!), and folders with a lot of pictures in them (in conjunction with the "Show Icon Preview" feature).

I will say, however, that it really was great back in the old days when we didn't have large numbers of files.

Look at it this way: Do you use the 'browse' feature or the 'search' feature when finding a song in iTunes... column view vs. spotlight in practice.

I use both, actually, depending on what I want to do. If I'm looking for a certain track, I'll use Search. If I want to browse by composer, though, I'll click the Composer header to sort the tracks, and then browse.

Point being, this has nothig to do with spatial vs column view vs CLI - Spotlight pulvarizes them all in this regard, as it is *specifically* designed to do. Naturally.

So what is the spatial Finder for?

If you are sharing files/folder other users can't change the way *you* see it. That's a new one on me but hey. You should file that as a bug with Apple, but it has *nothing* to do with spatial view or metaphors.

Actually there's one DS_Store file, and whoever owns it, everyone else is stuck with his settings.

You know the argument you make against the spatial view not being good because you can mess it all up by accident just doesn't hold water. Spatial view can well be arranged in whatever way you want, alphabetical etc but that has nothing to do with it being *spatial*. You're saying column view is ultimately better because it's always 'locked' in alpabetical listing! Well good for you. But this isn't about which is better. Such a discussion is beyond silly.

Nah, it's better because it is always sorted, it displays a lot of information on the screen at once compared to icon view, and it can be navigated through really, really fast.

You like column view and I like icon view, but I've got a news for you: They are not mutually exclusive and neither one is going anywhere.

Yeah, but it can get annoying. Example: You open a disk image which is in icon view (one legit use of icon view IMO as there are usually very few icons) and has one app, and you drag it over your Applications folder in the left Finder sidebar. Spring-loaded folders kick in, and your Applications folder gets displayed in Icon View even if you had it set to Column View. If you wanted to drop that app in the Utilities folder, now you've got to find the Utilities folder. Not nice. And the keyboard doesn't help you here, either.

Spatial is king in the home folder IMO.

Dig around in ~/Library much?

For anything outside the home folder I use the search feature or CLI. I can't wait for Spotlight in Tiger. I won't use anything else outside my home folder for sure. Column view just doesn't suit me, I don't think in file paths. I see files and remember their position accordingly, just like I know where I left my jacket, my cigarettes, my keys etc. In the real world there isn't a path from a root to *everything*. This makes a computer heck of a lot easier to use and that is what the spatial metaphor is all about. It has nothing to do with Clean Up options or accidents. Those are just features on top that may or may not be useful..

Agreed that Spotlight will be a very nice addition.

Spatial view is pretty much already in the 10.3 Finder. It would be great to see it go all the way. It is there to stay anyway it seems, so make it proper I say!

PS: Why the advocates of column view are always trying to slam those who'd like to see a feature complete spatial Finder is beyond me. Like I never really use column view you guys never really have to use spatial view, unless you so desire.

Not so; it seems to switch to spatial mode quite a bit for odd reasons (see my spring-loaded folders comment above). Also, sometimes I've had apps in the Dock, DragThing, or whatever insist on being in spatial mode with no sidebar when I command-click them, despite repeated attempts to switch the folder. Sometimes you have to go fix the permissions on the .DS_Store file, and it's just annoying. Finally, Icon View seems to always be the default mode for new folders, and there doesn't seem to be any way to change that (the "Always open new windows in column view" option in the Finder's Preferences doesn't work).

I dunno, I guess I wouldn't have too many problems with the thing if it would just stay out of my face and not keep popping up when I don't want it.

[IamBob]

Why the advocates of column view are always trying to slam those who'd like to see a feature complete spatial Finder is beyond me.

It's nothing personal. Column view advocates (for the most part) are slamming the spatial Finder, not the people that want it. Besides, evangelizing is in our DNA, a mutation that occurs after having used Macs for years.

Yeah, but it can get annoying. Example: ....

I was going to mention that earlier but couldn't think of how to put it, well said!

Let me edit again and add that "Open new windows in column view" has no effect on that situation either.

[Randman]

Why would Apple even consider creating an OS that doesn't have the functionality of OSX? OS9 was fine in its day but that day has passed. Get over it.

[voodoo]

CharlesS wrote:

Yeah, but it can get annoying. Example: You open a disk image which is in icon view (one legit use of icon view IMO as there are usually very few icons) and has one app, and you drag it over your Applications folder in the left Finder sidebar. Spring-loaded folders kick in, and your Applications folder gets displayed in Icon View even if you had it set to Column View.

Ironically this is something that annoys me as well - I am doing exactly the same and if the dmg is set in browser icon view - *not* spatial - it will change my view to browser icon view when doing the same as you did above.

Icon view does not = spatial.

In any case you seem to be more annoyed with inconsistancies in the Mac OS rather than spatial view at all. I don't think you can turn on the spatial features of the Finder by accident at all. Icon view, yes but that isn't spatial any more than a wheel is a car. It's an important part for sure, but it ain't no car.

As for my overstatement.. I said there was no way to navigate trough folders containing a huge number of files with anything but a search filter. My example in vivo is iTunes. Typically my iTunes library contains more than 1400 songs. That's the size I'm thinking of when I say 'a huge number of files in a folder'. I and everyone I know that use iTunes (many PeeCeee users) use the 'search' window pretty much exclusively. Simply because it is fast. To paraphrase Steve: You just write the part of the song name and BooM�. A very short list of possible titles appears.

The alternative would be to scroll down alphabetically or use the 'browse' feature. I use the browse feature a lot when using my iPod mini and considering how dexterous and proficient I am with my iPod's controls (which are damn good to have in column view) I'm still much much faster finding things through the 'search' feature of iTunes. It is more efficent.

I'm glad we agree that Spotlight will be a major boon for us browsing the HD, finding project files or whatever that could be anywhere - but really really fast. It is important because outside your home folder you can't be sure everything is where you expect it if you are not the only user on that computer.

You're right in saying this topic isn't about icon view vs column view, but as I said I felt I had to clear up some misconceptions you have about icon view - the major one is when you equate icon view with spatial view (or metaphor).

That already being done, you asked what the spatial Finder was for. Quite simply it is for *exactly* the same as column view is for. Whenever you use column view, I'd use spatial view. Simple. Column view is a better browser but spatial view is a better visual browser. No wonder, it has bigger icons, windows that essentially represent a folder etc. It is very visual. Which does one like better? That's not just a preference but often talent that chooses for you. A person that sits down in front of his Mac doesn't stop being a human at that point. That person will still have certain strenghts and weaknesses. Dexterous vs not so dexterous, remembers names very well vs remembers directions very well vs remembers faces very well.. Whatever our combination of talents is, that is going to be the fundamental thing that decides how comfortably we interact with the Mac. Simple as that. Take me for example, I have never been comfortable with column view. I remember when Steve showed it in a keynote when OS X was introed and it made *perfect* sense to me. I thought it was brilliant! Really a smart and fast way to browse through the hierarchy. Then when I tried it just didn't work for me as well as it had worked for Steve and all the other people that use it with ease. I realized that I *can't* really use this view as effectively as I can use the spatial view. My father uses column view exclusively for instance and he became instantly comfortable with it (he's a long time Mac user, since the System 6 days) but not me. I realize that there is nothing wrong with either me or the column view, but apparently it just doesn't suit me as well as the spatial view. It sounds to me the exact opposite applies to you CharlesS.

You asked if I dig around ~/Library much - well no I don't

but

Occationally I wander into Application Support but that's about it. I'd say I use /Library more but then through the Terminal CLI. I've changed a few icons that way and such. The ~/Library is really small in comparison though and well within spatial view's capabilities if you know what you are looking for. If I wasn't sure what I was looking for I'd have to resort to using 'Search', no matter what view mode I was in.

Reading your last paragraph I have to say it again: Icon view does not equal spatial view. You are talking about icon view in browser mode and that simply couldn't be further from spatial mode. Browser is a big no no in spatial. Your beef is that Apple insists to have icon view as some kind of a default view in the Finder. Really, spatial view is never in your face. You *have to* turn it on very much manually to ever see it in OS X's Finder.

Apple's inconsistancies in the GUI annoy me just as much. I don't like being in spatial mode, opening a new window in through another app (like when you choose 'show location' on a download in Safari) the Finder will open a window in icon view *browser* mode. We are actully experiencing the same annoyances *without* actually being in each other's face after all. I never see column view by accident and you never see spatial view my accident. Both of us get browser or icon view stuffed in our faces when we least expect it.

See why consistancy is such a good thing, and how badly Apple has screwed up consistancy in OS X so far?

[CharlesS]

Originally posted by voodoo:
I don't think you can turn on the spatial features of the Finder by accident at all.

Yes you can - the window mode seems to be a property of each folder, and once it gets set that way, it can be quite a bitch to get it set back to browser mode again!

As for my overstatement.. I said there was no way to navigate trough folders containing a huge number of files with anything but a search filter. My example in vivo is iTunes. Typically my iTunes library contains more than 1400 songs. That's the size I'm thinking of when I say 'a huge number of files in a folder'. I and everyone I know that use iTunes (many PeeCeee users) use the 'search' window pretty much exclusively. Simply because it is fast. To paraphrase Steve: You just write the part of the song name and BooM�. A very short list of possible titles appears.

Good for you. I've got 1756 tracks in my iTunes library, and I use both search and browse by album, by composer, by artist, etc. To say that the latter is impossible is a gross overstatement, pure and simple.

I'm glad we agree that Spotlight will be a major boon for us browsing the HD, finding project files or whatever that could be anywhere - but really really fast. It is important because outside your home folder you can't be sure everything is where you expect it if you are not the only user on that computer.

If you thought I was negating the usefulness of search by preferring column view over icon/spatial view, well, that's... interesting.

That already being done, you asked what the spatial Finder was for. Quite simply it is for *exactly* the same as column view is for. Whenever you use column view, I'd use spatial view. Simple. Column view is a better browser but spatial view is a better visual browser. No wonder, it has bigger icons, windows that essentially represent a folder etc. It is very visual. Which does one like better? That's not just a preference but often talent that chooses for you. A person that sits down in front of his Mac doesn't stop being a human at that point. That person will still have certain strenghts and weaknesses. Dexterous vs not so dexterous, remembers names very well vs remembers directions very well vs remembers faces very well.. Whatever our combination of talents is, that is going to be the fundamental thing that decides how comfortably we interact with the Mac. Simple as that. Take me for example, I have never been comfortable with column view. I remember when Steve showed it in a keynote when OS X was introed and it made *perfect* sense to me. I thought it was brilliant! Really a smart and fast way to browse through the hierarchy. Then when I tried it just didn't work for me as well as it had worked for Steve and all the other people that use it with ease. I realized that I *can't* really use this view as effectively as I can use the spatial view. My father uses column view exclusively for instance and he became instantly comfortable with it (he's a long time Mac user, since the System 6 days) but not me. I realize that there is nothing wrong with either me or the column view, but apparently it just doesn't suit me as well as the spatial view. It sounds to me the exact opposite applies to you CharlesS.

This didn't really answer my question, though. Why do you find icon/spatial view to work better for you? What advantages does it have? How does being "visual" help you? I'm genuinely curious about this. I used to use spatial view all the time in the old Mac OS, but eventually I found myself keeping my left hand permanently planted on the Option key while using the Finder. When Spring-Loaded Folders and "click-and-a-half" came out in OS 8, I loved it as it kept windows from getting all over the place. When OS X came out, I started using column view for everything and found it to be much faster and efficient.

The one point you brought up, about being more "visual", seems to apply more to icon view, which you keep insisting is not the point of a spatial mode. From what I can gather on here, the argument is that the "cornerstone" of spatial mode is not being able to have the same folder represented more than once at a time. How does this help you exactly? The essence of spatial mode is defined by something you can't do, rather than what it does let you do?

You asked if I dig around ~/Library much - well no I don't

Heh, going through ~/Library/Preferences in icon view would be... challenging.

Occationally I wander into Application Support but that's about it. I'd say I use /Library more but then through the Terminal CLI. I've changed a few icons that way and such. The ~/Library is really small in comparison though and well within spatial view's capabilities if you know what you are looking for. If I wasn't sure what I was looking for I'd have to resort to using 'Search', no matter what view mode I was in.

Actually I find ~/Library to have many more files than /Library (at least, when we're talking about files that I'd actually want to work with). The Preferences folder can get huge.

Reading your last paragraph I have to say it again: Icon view does not equal spatial view. You are talking about icon view in browser mode and that simply couldn't be further from spatial mode. Browser is a big no no in spatial. Your beef is that Apple insists to have icon view as some kind of a default view in the Finder. Really, spatial view is never in your face. You *have to* turn it on very much manually to ever see it in OS X's Finder.

Not so, it is a property of each folder, and it can come up unexpectedly if the folder got set that way somehow. I just had this issue the other day with an app I was command-clicking to get to its location. The window popped up in spatial mode, with no sidebar. I tried changing it, then closing the window, and command-clicking the app again. Bam, spatial mode. Tried going to the parent folder and back, then changing it. No go. After fighting the thing for a while, I went to the parent folder and command-clicked the folder, changed it, and closed it, and that finally got the change to stick. This shouldn't have been necessary.

[voodoo]

Originally posted by CharlesS:
Yes you can - the window mode seems to be a property of each folder, and once it gets set that way, it can be quite a bitch to get it set back to browser mode again!


Good for you. I've got 1756 tracks in my iTunes library, and I use both search and browse by album, by composer, by artist, etc. To say that the latter is impossible is a gross overstatement, pure and simple.


If you thought I was negating the usefulness of search by preferring column view over icon/spatial view, well, that's... interesting.


This didn't really answer my question, though. Why do you find icon/spatial view to work better for you? What advantages does it have? How does being "visual" help you? I'm genuinely curious about this. I used to use spatial view all the time in the old Mac OS, but eventually I found myself keeping my left hand permanently planted on the Option key while using the Finder. When Spring-Loaded Folders and "click-and-a-half" came out in OS 8, I loved it as it kept windows from getting all over the place. When OS X came out, I started using column view for everything and found it to be much faster and efficient.

The one point you brought up, about being more "visual", seems to apply more to icon view, which you keep insisting is not the point of a spatial mode. From what I can gather on here, the argument is that the "cornerstone" of spatial mode is not being able to have the same folder represented more than once at a time. How does this help you exactly? The essence of spatial mode is defined by something you can't do, rather than what it does let you do?


Heh, going through ~/Library/Preferences in icon view would be... challenging.


Actually I find ~/Library to have many more files than /Library (at least, when we're talking about files that I'd actually want to work with). The Preferences folder can get huge.


Not so, it is a property of each folder, and it can come up unexpectedly if the folder got set that way somehow. I just had this issue the other day with an app I was command-clicking to get to its location. The window popped up in spatial mode, with no sidebar. I tried changing it, then closing the window, and command-clicking the app again. Bam, spatial mode. Tried going to the parent folder and back, then changing it. No go. After fighting the thing for a while, I went to the parent folder and command-clicked the folder, changed it, and closed it, and that finally got the change to stick. This shouldn't have been necessary.

No, you *can't* turn spatial mode on by accident. Icon view, yes - but that isn't any more spatial than a wheel is a car. Certainly a part of the whole thing and indispensible but that's it. You can't accidentally find yourself in icon mode by accident sin browser. If you do then someone else has turned it on for you - e.g. in a dmg - but then that could just as well be applied to column view - someone could make his dmg open in column view much to my chagrin. The Finder will not change to spatial by itself. It will change to icon/browser mode all on its own though.

Right, you use both browse and search in iTunes and that officially makes you the only person I know that does it. Picture that. Anecdotal examples aside I use search in iTunes because it is fast and effective. Much more so than browse. You have your reasons for using browse I'm sure, but those will not include speed and efficiency. Convenience? (since you are an avid column view user in the Finder?) In the time it takes to click yourself through the three browse levels (and scroll up and down the alphabetical list to find the right entry) I'll have found what I'm looking for with 'search' and already listening to the song. I'm never said it was impossible to use column view in a folder with a huge amount of files, rather that live search is fantastically more efficient and fast. Even CLI is faster than column view in this regard if you know your way in the Terminal. Column view shines in medium sized folders with a large tree. Other than that.. it's mediocre.

I thought you were negating the usefulness of search/Spotlight by preferring column view period. What you thought of icon/spatial view never entered into that picture. You seem to have no qualms with using column view in folders that contain a huge amount of files. Somthing I'd never do. Not column view, icon view or even list view. Live search thank you.

Why does spatial view work better for me? That is as big a mystery to you as the reason how column view works better for you. Especially since you claim to have used OS 9 to some extent (even while you don't seem to grasp completely what the spatial metaphor is)

For me it works better because I remember the location of critical files by location. I usually don't even remeber what the folders are called that store said files are called, I just remember where they are. Naturally this makes it fantastically easy for me to navigate by sight and position. That is a spatial element. Things are in a specific location - obviously a path - but I don't think of it as a path but a place. If I thought of it as a path I'd have to remember the path itself. Most people navigate by thinking "to the right at that church then you'll see a grocery store turn left there.." etc. Remembering paths is like remembering the name on every street you need to walk on your way to your destination. It can be done but I navigate faster the other way.
That is also the reason icons are used because they display the maximum visual clues about the file. I remember that if it is a file with a certain appearance it is a Photoshop file. I recognize it much faster than by the .php suffix. Spatial again, because in a spatial world objects *are* something, they are not labeled something and become what they are labeled as. Not that I have anything against the suffixes, they are handy to confirm what you already know when you see the icon.
When the contents of a folder are displayed a seperate window is opened for that purpose. This seems redundant at first but when used in practice you find that every folder is a place of its own, a spatial object. This helps navigation a lot if you think of navigation visually. Window sizes and positions further help navigation as you remember how big or small a given window is when you last closed it. All done effortlessly. Not mental gymnastics, just natural abilities.
This is why no item can be present at more than one place at any given time. Then where is it? Forget all the visual navigation all of a sudden. It's just been screwed up pretty bad. Conistancy is key. I hope you understand why this is a big no no in spatial. (You claim to have used OS 9 but seem to have no understanding of this importance. Very curious.)
You create your environment, your workspace and your interaction with the machine. The machine works with you rather than you have to work it. That is spatial.

Come to think of it I never really go into ~/Library/Preferences/ - not much to do there on day to day basis.

[lookmark]

Originally posted by voodoo:
Right, you use both browse and search in iTunes and that officially makes you the only person I know that does it.

Huh? I use both browse and search, as do many people I know.

There should practically be a law in these kinds of discussions that you have to at least mention in passing what you use your computer *for*. Personally, I've noticed that graphic designers tend organize their computers much more spatially than, say, a programmer or your prototypical Average User.

(FWIW, I'm a designer who used OS 9 for many years, and far prefer column view and browsing; I use column view around 70% of the time, and the other 30% icon or list view in browser mode.)

[voodoo]

Originally posted by lookmark:
Huh? I use both browse and search, as do many people I know.

There should practically be a law in these kinds of discussions that you have to at least mention in passing what you use your computer *for*. Personally, I've noticed that graphic designers tend organize their computers much more spatially than, say, a programmer or your prototypical Average User.

(FWIW, I'm a designer who used OS 9 for many years, and far prefer column view and browsing; I use column view around 70% of the time, and the other 30% icon or list view in browser mode.)

A law? There should be a law requiring people to read and comprehend before posting. I clearly stated this was anecdotal and by my description that's also pretty obvious. So the fact remains that I know no-one that uses browse in iTunes. The people I know that use iTunes are artists, designers, scientists, medical doctors, students and construction workers. Many of them use columnn view as their prefered way to navigate files in the Finder but they ALL use 'search' in iTunes pretty much exclusively. I was simply giving an example from my life. Take it for what it's worth and don't waste your time slamming it. And to what end?

I have in MY experience not noticed any special trend among the people who choose icon over column view. But that doesn't really matter anyway. They are just views and not that fundamental alone by themselves.

Icon view is *not* spatial.

[CharlesS]

Originally posted by voodoo:
No, you *can't* turn spatial mode on by accident. Icon view, yes - but that isn't any more spatial than a wheel is a car.

Tell that to that folder on my hard drive that insisted on opening in spatial mode until I tried to change it about 5 times.

Right, you use both browse and search in iTunes and that officially makes you the only person I know that does it. Picture that.

Good for you. And all the people I know use both browse and search.

I thought you were negating the usefulness of search/Spotlight by preferring column view period. What you thought of icon/spatial view never entered into that picture. You seem to have no qualms with using column view in folders that contain a huge amount of files. Somthing I'd never do. Not column view, icon view or even list view. Live search thank you.

I'm sorry, but the fact is simply that I never said any such thing.

Why does spatial view work better for me? That is as big a mystery to you as the reason how column view works better for you. Especially since you claim to have used OS 9 to some extent (even while you don't seem to grasp completely what the spatial metaphor is)

Nice ad hominem attack. Thanks, it's really been great talking with you.

For me it works better because I remember the location of critical files by location. I usually don't even remeber what the folders are called that store said files are called, I just remember where they are. Naturally this makes it fantastically easy for me to navigate by sight and position. That is a spatial element. Things are in a specific location - obviously a path - but I don't think of it as a path but a place. If I thought of it as a path I'd have to remember the path itself. Most people navigate by thinking "to the right at that church then you'll see a grocery store turn left there.." etc. Remembering paths is like remembering the name on every street you need to walk on your way to your destination. It can be done but I navigate faster the other way.

Exactly. This is the way I used to work, too. The problem that I originally pointed out was that this is fragile and really throws you if you break it. Nothing more.

And, this is purely a property of icon view, which you seem to keep trying to remove from the discussion.

When the contents of a folder are displayed a seperate window is opened for that purpose. This seems redundant at first but when used in practice you find that every folder is a place of its own, a spatial object. This helps navigation a lot if you think of navigation visually. Window sizes and positions further help navigation as you remember how big or small a given window is when you last closed it. All done effortlessly. Not mental gymnastics, just natural abilities.
This is why no item can be present at more than one place at any given time. Then where is it? Forget all the visual navigation all of a sudden. It's just been screwed up pretty bad. Conistancy is key. I hope you understand why this is a big no no in spatial. (You claim to have used OS 9 but seem to have no understanding of this importance. Very curious.)
You create your environment, your workspace and your interaction with the machine. The machine works with you rather than you have to work it. That is spatial.

Whatever floats your boat. Personally I find the "Where the $%@# is the Utilities folder in this mess" problem to be much more confusing than a window moving a few pixels over or being a slightly different size. But to each his own, I guess.

Come to think of it I never really go into ~/Library/Preferences/ - not much to do there on day to day basis.

I'm in there all the time, to trash preferences related to my programs, when I want to reset to the defaults for testing purposes.

[voodoo]

Originally posted by CharlesS:
Tell that to that folder on my hard drive that insisted on opening in spatial mode until I tried to change it about 5 times.


Good for you. And all the people I know use both browse and search.


I'm sorry, but the fact is simply that I never said any such thing.


Nice ad hominem attack. Thanks, it's really been great talking with you.


Exactly. This is the way I used to work, too. The problem that I originally pointed out was that this is fragile and really throws you if you break it. Nothing more.

And, this is purely a property of icon view, which you seem to keep trying to remove from the discussion.


Whatever floats your boat. Personally I find the "Where the $%@# is the Utilities folder in this mess" problem to be much more confusing than a window moving a few pixels over or being a slightly different size. But to each his own, I guess.


I'm in there all the time, to trash preferences related to my programs, when I want to reset to the defaults for testing purposes.

Well this sudden change into spatial certainly has never happened to me. Ever. Into icon view, yes - but then always in browser mode.

As for the people I know who never use anything but 'search' in iTunes. Yeah good for me, but better for them because they are using a fast efficient method for finding their songs.. most of these people are no computer nerds. They just have a Mac or iTunes on a PeeCee and chose the most intuative and efficient way to find their songs in the iTunes library. It doesn't matter if you know people too, I was just giving you a real life example. I have yet to meet the person who uses 'browse' in iTunes and I do know quite a lot of people.

You wrote: "If you thought I was negating the usefulness of search by preferring column view over icon/spatial view, well, that's... interesting."

To which I replied: "I thought you were negating the usefulness of search/Spotlight by preferring column view period. What you thought of icon/spatial view never entered into that picture. You seem to have no qualms with using column view in folders that contain a huge amount of files. Somthing I'd never do. Not column view, icon view or even list view. Live search thank you."

To which you replied: "I'm sorry, but the fact is simply that I never said any such thing."

To which I must reply: The fact is you claimed to be using column view FOR EVERYTHING:
"When OS X came out, I started using column view for everything and found it to be much faster and efficient."

That means you use column view over search. Would you like to withdraw that statement or the one directly above?

I certainly did not make an ad hominem, i.e. a personal attack. I simply stated the obvious, that you appeared not to grasp what the spatial metaphor is - despite your claims that you've used OS 9 extensively.

To quote you after I commented on how the colum view is a GUI over the CLI:
"Which doesn't have a lot to do with the topic, really, which is the spatial Finder."
which is true enough but then you go straight to criticising ICON view in the next paragraph:

"To me, the reason was that I was able to arrange things exactly in such a manner, so I would know exactly where each often-used icon was. But, it was quite fragile and capable of really throwing me if it were disrupted. These days, the only things I use Icon View for are: [snip]"

Obviously this confuses me a lot because as I've said often enough in this thread: Icon view does NOT equal spatial view (metaphor) any more than a wheel equates a car.

Then you continue with: "The one point you brought up, about being more "visual", seems to apply more to icon view, which you keep insisting is not the point of a spatial mode."

So is it any wonder I'm a bit confused as to how extensive your understanding of the spatial metaphor is? It is clear as daylight that icon view is not spatial view. A makes B but B does not make A.

and in your last post you write: "this is purely a property of icon view, which you seem to keep trying to remove from the discussion..." having only a few posts ago written: ""Which doesn't have a lot to do with the topic, really, which is the spatial Finder."
-- really making it sound like you STILL think icon view IS spatial Finder. Either that or you've forgotten what the topic was spatial metaphor (that you decided btw - the topic is really "Will Apple ever make an OS that functions like OS 9 but has the feaatures of OS X?")

Your beef is obviously with icon view and some strange experiences you've had with it (while sharing your computer with others).
Actually, both OS 9 icon view and OS X you can have things "always snap to grid" while they are always in "alphabetical order" or "by size" etc. You can choose exactly how rigid the icon view is. I think you should just write Apple a letter explaining the problems you have with the implementation of icon view and how it bothers you so, but please stop calling icon view "spatial" view/mode/metaphor, because that just isn't the case.
If that is the case then OS X already has spatial view fully implemented, no? But it doesn't. The spatial elements themselves are missing even if the key components are present. Why that is hard to understand for someone how has used OS 9, a fully implemented spatial system is beyond me.

Whatever, we were discussing spatiality and not icon view. That's probably why you feel I'm avoiding icon-talk. That's just not what we were talking about. Icon view is already fully implemented in OS X. What is there to discuss there? The Finder shouldn't make it a default view against user prefs, sure but asides from that?

PS: Just read the John Syracusa comment you made. I make up my own mind thank you, but I've read John's articles about the spatial Finder. He's just stating obvious things that are painfully wrong in OS X's Finder and his suggestions for the future range from silly to something Apple is already implementing (e.g. Spotlight and smart folders)
Do you think Apple is putting those things into Tiger because John says so?? Hello!

@utidjian
I haven't tried the latest version of GNOME, the one I have hasn't been updated for at least more than a year! Glad to hear they are trying out the spatial metaphor!!

[Chuckit]

Originally posted by voodoo:
To which I must reply: The fact is you claimed to be using column view FOR EVERYTHING:
"When OS X came out, I started using column view for everything and found it to be much faster and efficient."

I thought it was fairly obvious that when he said "for everything," he meant "for all file-browsing purposes." I didn't take it to mean that he uses column view as a replacement for Photoshop, his coffee maker or, yes, the search function. These are unrelated to what he was talking about.

[voodoo]

Originally posted by Chuckit:
I thought it was fairly obvious that when he said "for everything," he meant "for all file-browsing purposes."

Yes that is how I understood it as well, but I consider the search/Spotlight function to be a part of file browsing.

Which it is.. unless you find something else with 'search' than files that is. That would be a new one on me.

[Chuckit]

Originally posted by voodoo:
Yes that is how I understood it as well, but I consider the search/Spotlight function to be a part of file browsing.

Which it is.. unless you find something else with 'search' than files that is. That would be a new one on me.

A search is unrelated to file organization or directory structure. It's a parallel idea to file-browsing, not a subcategory of it. Or that's how I view it, anyway.

[CharlesS]

Voodoo, please consider using the [QUOTE] tag to denote the difference between your reply and the text you are quoting. It would make your post actually readable.

[- - e r i k - -]

Originally posted by Andrew Stephens:
actually that bit WAS sarcasm!

I don't actually use expose that much as we don't keep files on the desktop at work,

I'm sorry. This just invalidates your comments. The desktop is not a place for storing files. You are just a disorganised person with bad habits.

[Randman]

Originally posted by erik:
I'm sorry. This just invalidates your comments. The desktop is not a place for storing files. You are just a disorganised person with bad habits.

That's a bit strong, isn't it? I may not like the desktop cluttered and you may not like the desktop cluttered, but someone else may prefer that.

[hudson1]

Originally posted by - - e r i k - -:
I'm sorry. This just invalidates your comments. The desktop is not a place for storing files. You are just a disorganised person with bad habits.

Long live MS-DOS !!!

[voodoo]

Originally posted by CharlesS:
Voodoo, please consider using the [QUOTE] tag to denote the difference between your reply and the text you are quoting. It would make your post actually readable.

???

Um why? I use the quote tag when appropriate, I think it is downright annoying to use it in a Zimphire-esque way like you want me to do. The text I wrote is most certainly readable, you just may not like what it says.

Which is funnny because we're talking about UI not politics or religion. Maybe you should lighten up already and realize that other people's opinions about UI are just as important and good as your own. In other words, no matter what your opinion is, it is no better than mine.

You asked for the reasons why I find the spatial model to work better and I replied with the very reasons why I think the spatial model works better. I don't expect it to work any better for you or anyone else who doesn't like it after I explained why it worked for me but neither do I expect constant criticism about it. Especially when the criticism is about icon view not the spatial metaphor.

I don't like column view for instance. I'd choose the Terminal over column view. I don't go around basing column view though. It's just counter-productive. Simply ignoring its existance and using whatever other method is available to me at the time suits me much much better.

I would like to see the methods/views I use on day to day basis improved upon. I don't care if you have an opinion on that, I've already sent Apple suggestions on what I would like to see improved. That's all that matters. If you can't have a civilized discussion about the Mac UI.. well then you really shouldn't. I'm always game for a good discussion but it gets tired quick when it is obvious the one you're discussing with isn't interested at all in discussing anything, rather just look for some points where he can make cheap-shots at preferences!

I'm glad that a hard-core anti-icon view (I'm still not sure what you think of the spatial metaphor because I haven't seen you criticize it at all yet) can only see three major issues (none of which are *really* major IMO). Files can become 'Cleaned Up' by accident. Oh-NO! If anyone had an issue with that he's just tick the "keep organized by name" box in the Finder view prefs. Problem solved for good. And that other people might mess up the way the files are organized. That is a so strange comment when you think about it. If there are few files it doesn't matter. You'll still see them all in one widow. If they are many then you'll have had to sort them by some order, alphabetical, date created etc - so if anyone screws up *your* order you'd simply click once and get precisely your order back. How is this a major issue? *Even* if it had *no* solution? Irritating for sure, but a fundamental UI problem? Related in any way to spatiality? No. Not at all. Lastly that icon view is a PITA in folders that contain many many files. True, but there is list view. One click and you have a relatively fast and efficient way to navigate a folder with many files (basically on par with column view except column view makes for faster navigation *through* folders but then again list view has more advanced sorting options than column view which makes it *better* than column view in this case..)

If these are the major fundamental problems a dedicated anti-icon-view person sees with spatiality then the spatial metaphor is even better in his opinion than mine. I could give a far longer list (and one that actually adressed *spatial* issues as opposed to icon-view irritations) than the opposition it seem. Ironic, no?