Man, dartar, we are totally on the same page. But what is meant by granularity? I have heard the term used before.

I think that OSX should at LEAST offer as much interface control and customization as XP. I think I mentioned this before. There are only 9 folder view option items available in OSX. Compare that with 32 in XP. Here is a good example. In my job, I needed to produce 500 images under 1000px with individual thumbnails at 200px and 150px. In OSX, I had no way of knowing which images were 1000px, 200px or 150px, or which may have been batched incorrectly. In XP, I added "dimensions" to my folder view, clicked to sort by "dimensions" and there were all the sizes lined up properly. With one glance, I was able to see which images went over 1000 and was able to select in one swipe, all the 200s to batch change the filename. This is only one example.

Don't get me wrong, OSX rocks in many areas, but the limitation of the Finder and its lack of options can be a real pain.

I wish I knew programming. I can barely do simple Terminal commands... sigh.

that alone would be worth the upgrade to me


also... allow the use of aqua throughout instead of the newer chrome view... i think aqua is prettier

What you're asking for is the Be FileSystem (BFS), who's author was hired by apple and is working on HFS.

The BFS is very cool in that you can add any metadata to the file, be it dimensions, size, usage, whatever you want, then you can sort by this new added metadata. Not only that, results are indexed so it's almost instantaneous. So you could create a folder for each size of your images and without caring where on the HD it is, you could have all your images of certain size in that folder.

So instead of being limited by what the programers think you should have, you can come up with your own.

I'm currently reading the book on it and it's fascinating. If you're interested:

<http://www.nobius.org/~dbg/>

Actually, when Expose is activated it IS resized actual windows, and in fact NOT screenshots.

This can be proved by opening iTunes, or a QuickTime movie or anything that has window activity, and using the Show All Windows Expose key.

There you go, the window activity is still working, iTunes's visualization still runs, the QuickTime move still runs :)

No, but I did get a call from India today asking me if I would be attending. That was a first..

The "screenshot" description was my clumsey way of saying I could not select a folder, drag them, or work with them. This is what I meant to say. Yes, it is still "visually active", but not in a workable way as if the actual windows were just resized temporarily.

Yes, that does sound awesome, but does that mean it is automated? For example, I did not have to enter the "dimensions" information, XP just knew it already. However, putting in your own metadata and sorting accordingly sounds like it has some great advantages as well, especially if you can do multiple selections to change the information (rather than one file at a time).

A subjective request, of course. However, this is why I think the individual user needs more control over the look. Some folks like the newer chrome view, others do not. The people that don't like it are told to "live with it". I would like to see some control over the Theme. Not enough to cause TechSupport calls, but more than is allowed now. For example, I think the color and texture of the aluminum windows, buttons tifs, default icons, initial welcome screens and backgrounds, as well as providing a few more "blessed" fonts for menus and lists can be changed with zero breakage to the OS. We can change our desktops and a few colors here and there. But on the most part, we are stuck with what Apple thinks we should like. And, I might add, Apple is getting inconsistent at this. GarageBand has a woodgrain/black brushed metal look, while other Apple apps have either the brushed aluminum look or the smooth Panther bar, and Photoshop CS has the light grey horizontal lines. Just centralize the textures in a System folder or go with solid colors. Inconsitancy does not make for a good interface.

$130 is quite a bit of money for me right now, so it will be interesting to see what Steve-o can pull out of the hat this time.

I wish for a stable system. All the rest is fluff!

Don't get upset but I am still running 10.2.8 on my 1G TiBook and I have no problems. I am actually afraid to upgrade because it works so nicely. I run Photoshop, after effects Avid et al and they work just fine. I keep hearing upgrade nightmares of black screens and blank disks. Having used macs forever, these new improvements (from 10.2-10.3) are no big deal--nice, fun but not crucial to the task.

Heck, my edit system at work is on 9.2 and it works great. I love OS X but even us pros don't REALLY need all the dodads. for me as long as its pumping out frame accurately w sync sound, and the spot is broadcast quality, who cares what system is running (except 8- I proudly skipped that horrorshow). I'll put my media composer on 9 against FCP on 10.3 any day!
Bring it on!!!

Now Multifinder, THAT was something worth buying

I guess the trick is skip every-other "upgrade" :)


But what do I know???? :eek:

I don't see how you have such a low opinion of 8. I actually stayed on 8.6 until I jumped to X. I never really went through nine for the reason you quote, it just all worked so well.


v

Obviously, if you are doing video on the Mac, you know quite a bit.
I do not blame you for not updating. "If it ain't broke, don't fix it" is a perfectly valid attitude. What Panther offered for me was fast user switching. So now my wife and I can pop back and forth on the same computer super-fast and easy.

I don't know about those horror stories, Panther has been quite stable for me.

The "fluff" that I am concerned about has to do with snapiness and ease of navigation. I find it terrible that I still see the spinning lollipop at version .3!

i understand the if it aint broke don't fix it attitude

but with the "boot off firewire" option you can use carbon copy cloner to copy your drive.... then install OS X from a friends copy to the new drive to give it a test run as a video platform for a few days....

and if you like it you just buy OS X and install your legitimate copy

Only in some parts of Panther
 

Ah, but not in a save or open dialog. In Windows, I got used to being able to:

Do a "save as"

In the Save dialog, highlight the original file

Do CTRL-C, then CTRL-V, to back up the original

Hit ENTER to save

This is a quick easy way to make backup copies that have automatically sensible names [Copy 1 of ... Copy 2 of ...], and still keep the current version named the same. It's better than having to put version numbers on files myself--less error prone--and quick.

And I've been doing it over ten years--not exactly a new idea.

See heirarchy -- from the keyboard?
 

Is it possible to show the folder hierarchy in a drop-down list via keyboard commands? I can't figure out how. It'd be great if it did -- heck, it be great if it were possible to use the Mac without having to touch the mouse except to draw. I don't see much on any computer that can't be accomplished with keyboards quicker than with a mouse, and, anyway, the damn thing's not accessible enough to disabled persons until it's totally free of the need for a mouse, anyway.

Weeeelllll... so you have to do some slightly different things with OS X and possibly use some forethought. If you're already in a Save dialogue, why not just name the file something else for your back up?
IMO, OS X shouldn't be copying everything Windows does, plus do what it does. Talk about bloat..

But we digress. This thread was started as an 'are you going to WWDC?'.
I must say, besides the multiple phone calls I've gotten asking if I'm going, I've also recieved multiple emails asking me to attend. I don't remember this from years previous, think attendance is down this year?

Forethought? How about reading the post next time?
 

I believe I made that clear already, but let's restate it for you: when the OS names a file with incremental numbers, it doesn't make mistakes, but sometimes people do. The Windows method also relieves the user of thinking up a naming convention [saving time and reducing another source of error], and, finally, it is faster -- requires fewer keystrokes and fewer operations of the mouse.

Finally, nowhere in my message was it suggested that OSX should "copying everything Windows does, plus do what it does." I don't see a post where anyone else has suggested such nonsense, either.

Seems like a subtle desire of all those who attempt to compare functionalities they are used to in Windows to those that are missing in Mac OS X. Think of it as a general misplaced observation on my part, certainly not a crack at you.
People certainly do make mistakes. I'd just be happy if most of my users actually remembered to not work on original documents. Again, we're digressing from the o.p.'s thread.

I would like to second OSXPounder here.

If Apple were following Yellow's approach, they would have never brought in Fast User Switching. Steve Jobs was not afraid to admit that there was something that XP was doing right that Mac was doing wrong. No one wants to turn the Mac into a PC, however, there are some very important features that OSX is lacking in its user interface that are gradually creeping in. I do agree that there needs to be a cut and paste folders and files ability--to me this is just BASIC navigation and editing.

While I am on this subject, I also think that there should be a preference to turn on the keyboard shortcut command underline (where one letter is underlined in a menu command to allow cntrl-letter selection) so that EVERY menu item is available via the keyboard. But we may be too late for that now.

Mac OS X keyboard shortcuts

Enjoy . . . and discuss at the WWDC! :p

Must.. not.. continue.. thread... digression...
 

My 'approach' isn't to wear blinders and ignore all the good things that could come out of expanding the usability in OS X by borrowing from other OSes. My 'approach' is (in some instances) there are existing alternative methods to do things. They might not be performed the way that someone expects when they migrate from another OS and are accustomed to doing it in a certain way. It might just take a bit of 're-learning' to make it work for you. I see a lot of posters with bitter sentiments because OS X doesn't work the way they think it should. Personally, I think I've gotten along pretty well for a very long time without all those bells and whistles.
Ignorance is bliss I guess...

I can't wait for WWDC '04!!!!

Cap'n Hector reads over the list.

Cap'n Hector reflects on the fact that he was at Apple HQ on Monday…

To answer your feature requests:

Yes, no, yes, yes, no, maybe, no, no, 14, a big one, yes it is, Steve would never go for it, perhaps, slightly, 34x, of course, free, 1.56, dogcow, no, no, yes, no but Sun did, never, not until the next release.

I hope this helps.

I'm with you all the way on all these ideas, schneb
 

I'd love to see that, or an alternative. To clarify: I don't imply OSX should imitate any particular OS, but I do note that one well-known and disliked OS does have some nice features I want, and have grown accustomed to. I believe my explanation accounted for reasons other than habit; I mentioned speed and error reduction, in fact. The reason I developed the habit is because I saw the wisdom therein. I got a little sarcastic; I should not have.

I'd love to discuss this at WWDC, but I can't attend conferences this year at all -- sinking budget year. :( I usually like to attend SIGGRAPH, though.