The Finder is more than OUT!
jo.y...@gmail.com
i work on a Leopard. 10.5.6 and the "Finder" seems every day more
outdated and useless, compard to a couple of very innovative 3-party
solutions/applications like:
.Punakea
http://www.nudgenudge.eu/
.Deep
http://www.ironicsoftware.com/deep/index.html
.Journler
http://journler.com/download/index.php
.Quicksilver
http://www.blacktree.com/
.Eversave
http://www.tool-forcesw.com/eversave/
The "Finder" is out. The Hard Disc has only for storage data, and to
list Data in:
-Text
-Image
-Audio
-Video
-Applications
i'm not interested to see any of the "normal" folders. The only useful
though is:
-Smart folder
-trash basket
i'll access quickly to my documents, ect. I purpose sorting by:
-Tags
-extension
-labels
i'm not interested to save documents. They should save themselves.
then some little features, like:
-move command
-logical solution for the context-menu, service-menu (the possibility
to manage contents of these menus)
-trash basket with feedback-feature (for uninstalling applications)
I want a new "Finder" with all this characterstics.
Tom Harrington
<61bc63e6-9d5b-44c1...@g19g2000yql.googlegroups.com>,
jo.y...@gmail.com wrote:
> I want a new "Finder" with all this characterstics.
This is a programmer newsgroup-- what have you done so far to create
this new system? The developer tools are free, so go for it!
--
Tom "Tom" Harrington
Independent Mac OS X developer since 2002
http://www.atomicbird.com/
jo.y...@gmail.com
> > I want a new "Finder" with all this characterstics.
>
> This is a programmer newsgroup-- what have you done so far to create
> this new system? The developer tools are free, so go for it!
>
> --
> Tom "Tom" Harrington
> Independent Mac OS X developer since 2002http://www.atomicbird.com/
Hey, Tom
i'm not programmer, but i can design interfaces and write any
imaginable applescript (hopefully for everydays use), but i would give
a feedback/inspiration for interested people with programming
knowledge. Perhaps somebody can tell my how and where to begin with
xcode. (a list of 12 steps to get into)
Marc Stibane
> Perhaps somebody can tell my how and where to begin with
> xcode. (a list of 12 steps to get into)
Step 1: Install Xcode from the DVD which came with your Mac...
--
In a world without walls and fences,
who needs windows and gates?
Sherm Pendley
> <jo.y...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Perhaps somebody can tell my how and where to begin with
>> xcode. (a list of 12 steps to get into)
>
> Step 1: Install Xcode from the DVD which came with your Mac...
...
Step 3: Profit!
sherm--
--
My blog: http://shermspace.blogspot.com
Cocoa programming in Perl: http://camelbones.sourceforge.net
jo.y...@gmail.com
> spamfal...@arcor.de (Marc Stibane) writes:
> > <jo.y.v...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >> Perhaps somebody can tell my how and where to begin with
> >> xcode. (a list of 12 steps to get into)
>
> > Step 1: Install Xcode from the DVD which came with your Mac...
>
> ...
>
> Step 3: Profit!
>
> sherm--
>
> --
> My blog:http://shermspace.blogspot.com
> Cocoa programming in Perl:http://camelbones.sourceforge.net
Hm. mine is only a macbook, so we can't expect so much in
programming..but i've a good Interface concept. Someone will take a
look to my ideas ?
http://i581.photobucket.com/albums/ss257/jart_w/Interface%20design%20concepts/InterfaceConcept1.png
http://i581.photobucket.com/albums/ss257/jart_w/Interface%20design%20concepts/InterfaceConcept2.png
http://i581.photobucket.com/albums/ss257/jart_w/Interface%20design%20concepts/InterfaceConcept3.png
Gregory Weston
<5f3dcd35-4cc0-4d04...@y13g2000yqn.googlegroups.com>,
jo.y...@gmail.com wrote:
> On 31 Mar, 17:19, Sherm Pendley <spamt...@dot-app.org> wrote:
> > spamfal...@arcor.de (Marc Stibane) writes:
> > > <jo.y.v...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > >> Perhaps somebody can tell my how and where to begin with
> > >> xcode. (a list of 12 steps to get into)
> >
> > > Step 1: Install Xcode from the DVD which came with your Mac...
> >
> > ...
> >
> > Step 3: Profit!
> >
> > sherm--
> >
> > --
> > My blog:http://shermspace.blogspot.com
> > Cocoa programming in Perl:http://camelbones.sourceforge.net
>
> Hm. mine is only a macbook, so we can't expect so much in
> programming.
Huh? A MacBook is far above the practical minimum OS X development
machine today.
>.but i've a good Interface concept. Someone will take a
> look to my ideas ?
>
> http://i581.photobucket.com/albums/ss257/jart_w/Interface%20design%20concepts/
> InterfaceConcept1.png
> http://i581.photobucket.com/albums/ss257/jart_w/Interface%20design%20concepts/
> InterfaceConcept2.png
> http://i581.photobucket.com/albums/ss257/jart_w/Interface%20design%20concepts/
> InterfaceConcept3.png
Pictures don't do it justice. By which I mean: I really don't understand
what you're trying to illustrate at all. It's a mess.
--
I saw a truck today that had "AAA Batteries / Delivered and Installed" on the
side. My first thought was: That's a really weird business model. How many
inept people have urgent need of skinny little battery cells?
jo.y...@gmail.com
http://i581.photobucket.com/albums/ss257/jart_w/Interface%20design%20concepts/InterfaceConcept1.png
http://i581.photobucket.com/albums/ss257/jart_w/Interface%20design%20concepts/InterfaceConcept2.png
http://i581.photobucket.com/albums/ss257/jart_w/Interface%20design%20concepts/InterfaceConcept3.png
> Pictures don't do it justice. By which I mean: I really don't understand
> what you're trying to illustrate at all. It's a mess.
Its a concept, at all. You've right to assert the things i try to
illustrate are a "mess", i've putted to much informations in both
windows. Perhaps a step-by step illustration will help the
understanding. Elsewhere i'll not agree with you for the word "mess".
Simpler as these interfaces..the original Finder is a mess..i had
wrote 100 or more applescripts for the finder, since i bought my first
mac os, exactly 6 years ago.
Tom Harrington
<c0853c64-9467-4101...@e18g2000yqo.googlegroups.com>,
jo.y...@gmail.com wrote:
> Hello, Gregory
>
> http://i581.photobucket.com/albums/ss257/jart_w/Interface%20design%20concepts/
> InterfaceConcept1.png
> http://i581.photobucket.com/albums/ss257/jart_w/Interface%20design%20concepts/
> InterfaceConcept2.png
> http://i581.photobucket.com/albums/ss257/jart_w/Interface%20design%20concepts/
> InterfaceConcept3.png
>
> > Pictures don't do it justice. By which I mean: I really don't understand
> > what you're trying to illustrate at all. It's a mess.
>
> Its a concept, at all. You've right to assert the things i try to
> illustrate are a "mess", i've putted to much informations in both
> windows. Perhaps a step-by step illustration will help the
> understanding. Elsewhere i'll not agree with you for the word "mess".
> Simpler as these interfaces..the original Finder is a mess..i had
> wrote 100 or more applescripts for the finder, since i bought my first
> mac os, exactly 6 years ago.
I can't speak for Gregory but I'd say it's a mess too-- not, as you
suggest, because the idea is fundamentally a mess, but because the
diagrams fail to convey a clear explanation of what you hope to
accomplish. Whether the underlying ideas are good or bad, the diagrams
are not presenting them well.
Gregory Weston
> Hello, Gregory
>
> http://i581.photobucket.com/albums/ss257/jart_w/Interface%20design%20concepts/
> InterfaceConcept1.png
> http://i581.photobucket.com/albums/ss257/jart_w/Interface%20design%20concepts/
> InterfaceConcept2.png
> http://i581.photobucket.com/albums/ss257/jart_w/Interface%20design%20concepts/
> InterfaceConcept3.png
>
> > Pictures don't do it justice. By which I mean: I really don't understand
> > what you're trying to illustrate at all. It's a mess.
>
> Its a concept, at all. You've right to assert the things i try to
> illustrate are a "mess", i've putted to much informations in both
> windows. Perhaps a step-by step illustration will help the
> understanding.
Perhaps. Or words, for that matter. As in real descriptions of the
interface elements and their behavior. You've invented new terms without
defining them and then used them all over those illustrations. I don't
know what's going on with those new elements rooted in the upper-left
and lower-right corners, although I think I've now worked out that the
latter is what you're calling a "label panel." I have no clue what a
"bubble" is in your UI. There are lines and arrows and sentence
fragments all over the place. I'm not sure what the point is of the
element that apparently carries the icon of the last used storage device
...
> Elsewhere i'll not agree with you for the word "mess".
> Simpler as these interfaces..the original Finder is a mess..i had
> wrote 100 or more applescripts for the finder, since i bought my first
> mac os, exactly 6 years ago.
Not to put to fine a point on it, what does your experience of writing
AppleScripts have to do with the usability and efficiency of the
graphical UI?
I also note that while you started out talking about a personal
dissatisfaction with the stock file system interface (aka Finder) you're
really illustrating a massive overhaul of the system UI.
What I'm looking at is a mess. Whether that's because there's something
fundamentally broken about the idea or just that the illustrations are
flawed or incomplete is something I can't tell.
jo.y...@gmail.com
thanks for showing interesting.
i've done some cleanup for reading and understanding better my
diagrams. Have a bit of patience. And get me a bit feedback (with mess
or worderful is said nothing about what you are mean.)
http://i581.photobucket.com/albums/ss257/jart_w/Interface%20design%20concepts/InterfaceConcept1a.png
http://i581.photobucket.com/albums/ss257/jart_w/Interface%20design%20concepts/InterfaceConcept2b.png
my idea is:
only smart folders (no more folders at all- only sorted files on hard-
disc)
documents stored on hd, but not visible, only the search mode detects
these spread data on hard disc
- labels
- tags (collect everything with a simple, meanigful, personal mode)
- support for external devices
- status control (for checking Network signal strengh, Ram
consumption, Battery charge-if a laptop, ect utils)
- shelf (like a container for access your favorite documents/
applications)
- the dinamic of widgets (simple and cooperative thrugh nodes)
- graphical commands
let's clean up!
i'm inspired of Quicksilver: i do nothing with the finder.
i suggest to construct a new manner of dealing with files(all kind of
used files like documents and applications): they have to be sorted as
specific cathegories:
-Web
-Graphical elements (2d/3d)
-Text elements (editors)
-Audio (music elements)
-Multimedia elem. (Video)
-Utility elements (Monitoring activities lokal and outgoing info)
-Unclassified elements (the rest)
Thanks for the attention. Hey, guys, come on!
:)
Gregory Weston
<cd445778-5690-42dd...@e18g2000yqo.googlegroups.com>,
jo.y...@gmail.com wrote:
> Hello, Gregory and to other programmers here,
> thanks for showing interesting.
> i've done some cleanup for reading and understanding better my
> diagrams. Have a bit of patience. And get me a bit feedback (with mess
> or worderful is said nothing about what you are mean.)
>
> http://i581.photobucket.com/albums/ss257/jart_w/Interface%20design%20concepts/
> InterfaceConcept1a.png
> http://i581.photobucket.com/albums/ss257/jart_w/Interface%20design%20concepts/
> InterfaceConcept2b.png
I think I'm getting more of it. The things in the UL and LR corners are
sort of like minimized (or iconized) windows?
> my idea is:
>
> only smart folders (no more folders at all- only sorted files on hard-
> disc)
Sorted how? There's got to be some sort of real organization mechanism.
> documents stored on hd, but not visible, only the search mode detects
> these spread data on hard disc
I suggest that the above kills this idea in the market, even if the
general alien-ness does. Look at the ire that's generated over iTunes'
and iPhoto's default (but optional) behavior of taking over the task of
organizing content. Whether there's a real benefit or just a
psychological one, people *want* to at least feel they have control over
their data. It seems like you're suggesting a mechanism under which it's
mandatory that they cede control.
I'll agree with the general notion that Finder has substantial room for
improvement. Based on patent applications and other documentation that
oozes out of Cupertino, Apple agrees too. Baby steps, though. Don't
start by taking away the organization tools (and maybe don't end there,
either) but certainly find ways to enhance them. Leverage the logic
behind Time Machine to provide real (but optional) revision control,
something the FS supported in 1984 that was never actually used. You'll
end up effectively replacing your FS with a DBMS, which has been tried a
couple of times without real success. Do away with the standard file
dialogs, which IMO have been an anachronism for more than a decade.
Perhaps provide a sort of adaptive prioritization in the UI that makes
things easier to find when they get used heavily.
jo.y...@gmail.com
> sort of like minimized (or iconized) windows?
Yes! minimized widgets (another term:bubbles) to by exactly
> > only smart folders (no more folders at all- only sorted files on hard-
> > disc)
>
> Sorted how? There's got to be some sort of real organization mechanism.
> > documents stored on hd, but not visible, only the search mode detects
> > these spread data on hard disc
>
> I suggest that the above kills this idea in the market, even if the
> general alien-ness does.
:D
you are on right to assert this. Concept3 is a kind of "bridge" for
migrate to a new desktop experience.
> Look at the ire that's generated over iTunes'
> and iPhoto's default (but optional) behavior of taking over the task of
> organizing content.
I'll do that. But its in my mind, to broke with older UI. (without
losing the best of these ones, naturally- i need a list of the popular
and necessary features)
> Whether there's a real benefit or just a
> psychological one, people *want* to at least feel they have control over
> their data. It seems like you're suggesting a mechanism under which it's
> mandatory that they cede control.
:D
yes, i agree with you. But i'll create a new desktop experience- i
hope somebody helps me to to it right.
> I'll agree with the general notion that Finder has substantial room for
> improvement.
(the only good reason why i had begun to use the script editor..not
bad, at all-)
> Perhaps provide a sort of adaptive prioritization in the UI that makes
> things easier to find when they get used heavily.
Using openmeta, perhaps..
the guys of Punakea are working to implement that.
William Yeo
[snipt]
>
> http://i581.photobucket.com/albums/ss257/jart_w/Interface%20design%20concepts/
> InterfaceConcept1a.png
> http://i581.photobucket.com/albums/ss257/jart_w/Interface%20design%20concepts/
> InterfaceConcept2b.png
>
> my idea is:
>
> only smart folders (no more folders at all- only sorted files on hard-
[snipt]
> Thanks for the attention. Hey, guys, come on!
> :)
From what I have seen (and think I understand) of your 'revised' view of
what the finder should be doing, I feel that it wouldn't improve the
general access nor organization of the machine's capability for most
people.
This is simply because your organization is distilled from your usage
and understanding of how the computer works and how YOU interact with it.
From MY point of view, it obfuscates important information and your
re-stratification doesn't add anything sufficiently helpful to offset
the loss of flexibility. Further, elimination of 'folder's would
complicate my life horribly since it's such a fundamental part of my
organizational strategy.
This is a result of MY years dealing with computers, so naturally my
feelings about what is important (and where/how it should be displayed)
will differ from yours.
But the bottom line is that I think most programmers with enough
experience to actually write a new Finder wouldn't appreciate the form
that you propose. I'm guessing that's why you're having so little
success here.
Thanks for describing your ideal; it's always interesting to see how
others view the contents and how they think that information should be
presented.
jo.y...@gmail.com
> [snipt]
> > Thanks for the attention. Hey, guys, come on!
> > :)
>
> From what I have seen (and think I understand) of your 'revised' view of
> what the finder should be doing, I feel that it wouldn't improve the
> general access nor organization of the machine's capability for most
> people.
i use Quicksilver and Applescript todo anything imaginable. The Finder
is only a medium for me, but hear: thanks for your feedback, i
appreciate it. One of my teachers () have said a very intelligent
phrase: less is more, because then you have to be sure and precise,
instead to overload with more and more..chaotic things. I feel me
overhelmed from the finder filesystem; at the end i've to deal more in
the organization of folders, instead to work on my Text/Graphic-files.
Everything is todo in a manual manner, without or with a poor feedback
from the computer.
> This is simply because your organization is distilled from your usage
> and understanding of how the computer works and how YOU interact with it.
I believe in your words. But i wish a kind of next generation
management (hopefully doesn't sound too proudly)
> From MY point of view, it obfuscates important information and your
> re-stratification doesn't add anything sufficiently helpful to offset
> the loss of flexibility.
please explain..you know Quicksilver? Punakea? Together? I'm inspired
mainly by Quicksilver..
> Further, elimination of 'folder's would
> complicate my life horribly since it's such a fundamental part of my
> organizational strategy.
a new step asks new methods, without offense.
> This is a result of MY years dealing with computers, so naturally my
> feelings about what is important (and where/how it should be displayed)
> will differ from yours.
Naturally..but it is very interesting to discuss something new, and to
believe in something
> But the bottom line is that I think most programmers with enough
> experience to actually write a new Finder wouldn't appreciate the form
> that you propose. I'm guessing that's why you're having so little
> success here.
Why? please explain. The label-panels are only a list of minimized
widgets..none of these labels are static
> Thanks for describing your ideal; it's always interesting to see how
> others view the contents and how they think that information should be
> presented.
Thanks! you are welcome.
Walter Bushell
> On 31 Mar, 17:19, Sherm Pendley <spamt...@dot-app.org> wrote:
> > spamfal...@arcor.de (Marc Stibane) writes:
> > > <jo.y.v...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > >> Perhaps somebody can tell my how and where to begin with
> > >> xcode. (a list of 12 steps to get into)
> >
> > > Step 1: Install Xcode from the DVD which came with your Mac...
> >
> > ...
> >
> > Step 3: Profit!
> >
> > sherm--
> >
> > --
> > My blog:http://shermspace.blogspot.com
> > Cocoa programming in Perl:http://camelbones.sourceforge.net
>
> Hm. mine is only a macbook, so we can't expect so much in
> programming..but i've a good Interface concept. Someone will take a
> look to my ideas ?
>
> http://i581.photobucket.com/albums/ss257/jart_w/Interface%20design%20concepts/
> InterfaceConcept1.png
> http://i581.photobucket.com/albums/ss257/jart_w/Interface%20design%20concepts/
> InterfaceConcept2.png
> http://i581.photobucket.com/albums/ss257/jart_w/Interface%20design%20concepts/
> InterfaceConcept3.png
You don't need more. In fact more can be dangerous, if you want to sell
to macBook owners.