Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

I agree that Finder isn't the pinnacle of folder browsing applications. The best example of this from my own experience is how absurdly it is to copy the path of the current folder. The only built-in way I've found to do this is to drag the folder to a Terminal window and then manually copy the path from there.

I solved the problem with a little AppleScript I call with a Terminal command (pwdff) that copies the full path of the topmost Finder window to the clipboard. Ugly, ugly hack.

I think Finder's design is targeted at naive users, not power users (hence all the power user Finder replacements). I disagree with the parent post that Finder would be hard to use for a new user -- I've helped a number of people switch from Windows to Mac and never had a single question about performing file management tasks in Finder.

I do most of my complicated file management in Terminal on Mac. I would do the same thing in Windows if cmd.exe wasn't completely unusable (why can't I copy/paste normally into cmd.exe???). For everything else, I want the OS's file management app to get out of my way and let me access my files. Finder's minimalist design does that ok. For me, this ribbon thing is an aesthetic/usability nightmare.



What are you doing with textual paths that can't be satisfied by simply dragging the item from the Finder to the place where you want the path as text?


I wonder this too. It sounds like he's not evaluating the Finder, or any other window manager on its own merits. He's comparing it to what he's used before (command line) and assuming that any new way of doing things won't need relearning, or at least that relearning should be easy because he's a "poweruser." (Sort of how doctors end up being worse than average stock investors because they assume expertise in one field means skill in another.)

Someone might have a better feel for temps in degrees Fahrenheit over degrees Celsius. That doesn't mean Fahrenheit is inherently better than Celsius.


> It sounds like he's not evaluating the Finder, or any other window manager on its own merits. He's comparing it to what he's used before (command line) and assuming that any new way of doing things won't need relearning, or at least that relearning should be easy because he's a "poweruser."

- Assessing a window manager in isolation from the rest of your workflow makes no sense.

- Based on my experience with ribbons in Office, I think they are much less user-friendly than any other existing system of accessing commands. Primarily, I think this is because of the visual noise: there are lots of icons and words in an arbitrary layout (not rows or a grid) you have to parse through to find what you want. I think the same principle applies as with web forms (http://www.cxpartners.co.uk/cxinsights/web_forms_design_guid...) -- the ribbon makes you jump around between a whole bunch of icons before you find what you want.

- Spending more time with ribbons don't make them easier to use in practice. For example, I use conditional formatting, autofiltering, and sheet/worksheet protection all the time in Excel. I still am not able to remember which tab they are in on the ribbon (how does putting sheet protection on "Review" tab make any sense?).

> Someone might have a better feel for temps in degrees Fahrenheit over degrees Celsius. That doesn't mean Fahrenheit is inherently better than Celsius.

I'd say a better analogy would be between the US system of measuring volume (gallons, etc.) and the metric system. I've refused to learn the US system because the relationship between the different units is totally arbitrary. The arbitrary feel of the design of the Win 8 Explorer ribbon strikes me the same way.


there are lots of icons and words in an arbitrary layout (not rows or a grid)

They actually use a containment metaphor vs. a list or grid metaphor for orgnaization. Though I have to agree that once they're in the container it all goes to hell. And I can't for the life of me reliably remember which container contains what.


I don't use use my "pwdff" command that often. It is convenient if I need to read a specific file in a script that's buried in some folder.

I use my "cdff" command much more often, which changes the directory in Terminal to the frontmost Finder window. (And if you already have the folder up in Terminal, "pwd | pbcopy" is essentially the same as "pwdff".)


How did you find it? Honest question, had no idea about it until now...


Running it in a script maybe?




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: