[Ti] usability

[gkar at mac]

On 11/2/03 12:29 PM, "Joel Hopwood" <hopwood at zhian.com> wrote:

> 
> On Sunday, Nov 2, 2003, at 13:37 Europe/London, PowerBook G4 Titanium
> List wrote:
> 
>> Save your breath Jesse. What they are really saying is "It isn't like
>> OS 9"
>> and there isn't a thing you can say to them to make them change their
>> mind.
>> They were shocked to discover that OS X isn't Kansas any more and now
>> their
>> minds are firmly shut.
>> 
> 
> Hmm. What a sorry little response -- why did you bother? There are many
> reasons why a lot of mac users think that the current Finder is
> inferior to the current one; hope we're not pissing you off too much by
> discussing them. Jeez...
> 
There were tons of reasons not to like the pre-release OS X finder and if
you had been on the OS X list serve you'd have seen me lead the challenge. I
used the OS X Feedback line at Apple to send at least 20 emails (I'd say
closer to 50 but maybe that's just how it felt) detailing how the OS X
Finder fell down on the job.

My emails were reasoned, thoughtful, and detailed. In fact, I took a large
number of desktop pictures and posted them on my homepage and referred to
them to illustrate many of my complaints. On two occasions I was contacted
by OS X programmers about my messages.

The first release saw some small improvement and 10.1 saw a few more but
Jaguar's release was the first time I thought Apple thinking was having an
impact on the NeXT engineers. It isn't that the Jaguar Finder was 'Classic
like' because it wasn't. But there had been steady improvement and the
Finder was becoming less like NeXT's and more like Apple's.

Now we have Panther and if you are a died in the wool Class Finder user you
should give the 'Aqua Finder' a try. As I expressed in my message, I was
shocked and disappointed that a Mac user who has never found a good thing to
say about the OS X Finder didn't even bother to try it out. He completely
brushed it off because the widgets were in the wrong location.

More important however, has been the constantly low quality of discussion
about the Finder. "OS X Finder sux" is the general tenor of the
conversation. Or, the user lists 5 things that are wrong with the Finder -
that aren't. Just last week I had to listen to a 'computer expert' hold
forth on how WinXP is superior to OS X - his Mac had OS X 10.1 installed.

Is OS X Finder inferior to the old one? Let's start creating a detailed list
of the ways it is inferior. I had one for Jaguar and speed was at the top of
my list. But I haven't spent enough time with Panther to start yet. I've
seen one cosmetic flaw that I've sent to Apple - click on the right widget
to switch between 'Aqua Finder' and 'Metal Finder' and the widget moves. But
that, in the great scheme of things - is minor.

No - I stand by my original words. In too many cases when a person says the
OS X Finder is inferior what he is really saying is that it is different.
I've heard person after person explain how the OS X finder made him/her less
productive. Well, that's an argument I could buy if s/he spend a lot of time
moving large numbers of files. But more times than not the individual hadn't
even bothered to try changing how s/he worked.

I know, you are going to complain that Apple shouldn't have made us change
how we work. The Finder wasn't broken so why fix it. If you go back that
far, think about the System 6 Finder and then think of all the changes to
the Finder that occurred between System 6 and OS 9. Many of those changes
were just bolted on. The Finder accreted over a period of 15 years. Had it
been perfect it wouldn't have needed all those changes. Changes in
technology, in drive sizes, in what we do with our computers and how we use
them have dictated change. So change was inevitable.

The file selector has been one of the weakest links the MacOS for as long as
I've been a Mac user. I've been telling anyone who would listen how superior
the Mac OS is to anything else out there - but that file selector! What a
confusing mess it was. It confused and confounded new users more than a two
button mouse or the 'any' key ever could. But now look at the 'Metal Finder'
and the file selector - they go hand in hand. I've not had the opportunity
to introduce the Mac to a new user since the release of Panther, but I'm
betting that when I do the confusion over the file selector will be much
less than in the past. Now tell me this - could this same synergy of
function and form be accomplished with the Classic Finder?

No, discussions about the Finder don't piss me off - not when they are
intelligent and well reasoned. It isn't like the Classic Finder isn't well
reasoned. Saying it sucks isn't well reasoned. Tell me it crashes too much -
as if did under Jaguar - and I'll agree. Tell me Apple should scrap it and
give us the OS 9 Finder again and I won't. I've come to appreciate many
features of the new Finder - including the side bar.

My Finder complaints:

I want the 'Aqua Finder' to be draggable from all four sides
on a large monitor it is inconvenient to move to the top of the window all
the time

I want to be able to pick exactly which hard drives should appear in the
sidebar. I have a backup drive and a music drive in my desktop that really
doesn't need to be there because I don't navigate to them as a matter of
course. But having my application drive and data drive is convenient.

I want folders in the Finder toolbar to be spring loaded. There are times
when I don't want the sidebar and losing this functionality is inconvenient.

I want label colors in column view to extend only over the filename
  (I like that the color doesn't affect the icon itself)

So you see, I don't find the current Finder perfect - but I try to
articulate my complaints. Too few people do.

-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
One ring to rule them all, one ring to find them
One ring to bring them all and in the darkness bind them.

gkar at mac.com