Not a fan of the Panther Finder

[Matthew Butch]

I had a chance to test out the Panther Finder. Not a fan of it. The
sidebar takes up way to much space. Clicking on Home, will take you to
home, but you can't go up the hierarchy in column view. You can turn
off what shows in the sidebar, but it never goes away. The brushed
metal, I mean "textured", looks terrible. The Aqua view is useless w/o
the toolbar.

I like the Jaguar Finder much better. More compact. If instead of
redesigning the GUI of the Finder, and worked on what sucked with it,
they would have been more productive.



--

Matthew Butch


"To disagree with three-fourths of the British public is one of the
first requisites of sanity." -Oscar Wilde

"Commerce with all nations, alliance with none, should be our
motto"-Thomas Jefferson, 1799

Free State Project "Liberty in Our Lifetime"
http://www.freestateproject.com

Sent with MacOS X's Mail 1.2.5(v552)

[Stewart Johnson]

I second that. It is not intuitive for users. Although it might be easy
to get to a defined folder (Home ,Applications etc..) in the 'new' UI,
it has no feedback for where that folder is actually stored. Perhaps
'most' users don't need this though - I certainly find it useful...

SJ

__

Post by Matthew Butch
I had a chance to test out the Panther Finder. Not a fan of it. The
sidebar takes up way to much space. Clicking on Home, will take you to
home, but you can't go up the hierarchy in column view. You can turn
off what shows in the sidebar, but it never goes away. The brushed
metal, I mean "textured", looks terrible. The Aqua view is useless w/o
the toolbar.
I like the Jaguar Finder much better. More compact. If instead of
redesigning the GUI of the Finder, and worked on what sucked with it,
they would have been more productive.

[LuKreme (List User Kreme)]

Post by Matthew Butch
I had a chance to test out the Panther Finder. Not a fan of it. The
sidebar takes up way to much space. Clicking on Home, will take you to
home, but you can't go up the hierarchy in column view. You can turn
off what shows in the sidebar, but it never goes away. The brushed
metal, I mean "textured", looks terrible. The Aqua view is useless w/o
the toolbar.

What do you mean "without the toolbar?" the toolbar is still there in
Panther.

Post by Matthew Butch
I like the Jaguar Finder much better. More compact. If instead of
redesigning the GUI of the Finder, and worked on what sucked with it,
they would have been more productive.

I've not made up my mind about the Panther finder yet. I do notice
that it requires fewer windows, and many tasks that used to require
multiple windows can now easily be done with one, especially dragging
and dropping, since you always have your disks, at least, as targets
for SLFs without having to "scrub" the columns.

While it is true that each window loses the space, Each window is also
more useful, and fewer windows is a good thing.

OTOH, I've not really had much chance to really work with Panther as
yet, so my impressions are based on brief and infrequent exposures to
the XXXX<1> build and a couple of hours with the WWDC build.

<1> I've not been keeping up with the rumor sites, so I don't know if
build numbers have been leaked and I'd ate to get anyone in trouble.

[LuKreme (List User Kreme)]

Post by Stewart Johnson

Post by Matthew Butch
I like the Jaguar Finder much better. More compact. If instead of
redesigning the GUI of the Finder, and worked on what sucked with it,
they would have been more productive.

I second that. It is not intuitive for users. Although it might be
easy to get to a defined folder (Home ,Applications etc..) in the
'new' UI, it has no feedback for where that folder is actually stored.
Perhaps 'most' users don't need this though - I certainly find it
useful...

Where the folder is actually stored? And why, exactly, do you need
that? The folder is stored, for all intents and purposes, in the
sidebar. If you REALLY need the full path, the path widget is in the
toolbar. it's certainly not information that you need all the time, or
information that any regular user EVER needs.

[Alex Fuller]

Post by LuKreme (List User Kreme)
Where the folder is actually stored? And why, exactly, do you need
that? The folder is stored, for all intents and purposes, in the
sidebar. If you REALLY need the full path, the path widget is in the
toolbar. it's certainly not information that you need all the time,
or information that any regular user EVER needs.

Whoa, sounds like the WinXP philosophy to me (open your C drive looking
for all your files and all you get is a page saying "don't look in
here, you don't need to know").

However, moving back to the general Panther Finder discussion - I am
getting used to the sidebar now and find it a distinct improvement,
despite initial uncertainty. It makes sense to have it on the left,
particularly when in column view since that is how we are used to
setting a point we want to navigate from already. Also the trend is to
wider, not taller, screens these days - so if space is going to be
consumed perhaps it's better on the left than the top of the window.

However, I'm still not completely comfortable with the brushed metal
windows - and generally I have liked brushed metal in apps like QT
Player, iTunes etc. But it feels heavy and boxed-in in the Finder IMO.
I may revise that opinion when I am more used to it. The new layout
seems to use a bit more screen space than before per window (fat status
bar at the bottom annoys me).

You can still see the whole path of your hard drive by selecting the
"Computer" or your hard drive icon in the sidebar and drilling down
from there - but it is true you can no longer jump straight to a
shortcut like Applications or your home folder with a key press AND
retain the path back to the filesystem root.

However, Exposé is a fantastic feature, truly one of the greats. I
don't think I'm going to need CodeTek's VirtualDesktop now (which,
while it achieved a lot, could never get that level of seamless
operation I wanted).

Alex

[steve harley]

Post by LuKreme (List User Kreme)
Where the folder is actually stored?

to me that's crucial, but am i hearing correctly? it sounds
like if you click an item in the "bucket", you get a display
to the right of everything from that point _down_, but you
can't navigate _up_.. if so, that's just like the current
Favorites folder, or the general Finder behavior with folder
aliases.. i've gotten little use from Favorites (except in
Open/Save dialogs, where they aren't limited this way),
since my mental map goes both directions and i often use
"landmarks" in the toolbar as a place from which i may
navigate up _or_ down

the idea of landmarks is good, and i'm glad Apple is
facilitating them further, but there shouldn't be a
restriction on where you can go once you reach a landmark..
so if i'm interpreting this correctly, i foresee a need for
a "really go there" button in the toolbar

[Mark F. Murphy]

So... anyone have any comments on why Apple is doing Python bindings
for Quartz in Panther?

I also heard that Python is used to do some stuff with the print panel.

Is Apple warming up to using Python as a scripting engine?

mark

[Todd R. Warfel]

I've had a chance to play with the Panther Finder a bit as well. There
are a few minor things I don't like about it, but overall, I'd say it's
a wonderful improvement over the previous version(s).

I think you'll find that you'll get used to it rather quickly (just
like the new inbox model Mail.app uses). You may be surprised at how
fast your brain will remap to the behavior of the new Finder. It's
faster. It's more efficient. And most users could care less where
things live from a file structure perspective - that's not the average
computer user operates.

One thing we have to keep in mind about human and computer interaction
- computers systems were developed based on a file structure and we've
learned to adopt our thinking to that methodology. Humans, on the other
hand, don't typically operate (think) in a file structure mode. We're
more task oriented. I'm looking for {X}, get me there. Clicking an icon
(or another method) that gets me there helps me achieve my goal much
faster than drilling down through a file/folder structure. So, if we
can abstract a system out to better match our own mental models of
things, then computing can be easier, more productive, and less
frustrating.

Ever walked up to a desktop with 50+ documents on it? I see it all the
time. Ask them why they don't use the built in folder structure that
comes with the OS - after all, it helps you stay organized. The typical
response is "I can't find it that way," or "Yeah, I know, but I can
find it better this way." And that translates to "yeah, but that's not
they way I operate."

CONS of the new finder (based on my limited use):
• It's harder to drill up the hierarchy once you pick your "Home folder"
•• this could be overcome by dropping a "Users" folder in the left panel
• Left panel takes up additional space that could be critical on
smaller screen
• Still a bit slow
• Removal of shortcut items from the top menu bar that were previously
there

PROS:
• Faster than previous versions
• More productive
• Closer to mental models than strict file/folder based solution
• Left panel can be hidden
• Users will quickly remap (mentally) the shortcut items from the top
menu bar to the left pane.
• Left pane allows for drag and drop of shortcut items w/o going in to
"Customize Toolbar" mode.

Post by Matthew Butch
I had a chance to test out the Panther Finder. Not a fan of it. The
sidebar takes up way to much space. Clicking on Home, will take you to
home, but you can't go up the hierarchy in column view. You can turn
off what shows in the sidebar, but it never goes away. The brushed
metal, I mean "textured", looks terrible. The Aqua view is useless w/o
the toolbar.
I like the Jaguar Finder much better. More compact. If instead of
redesigning the GUI of the Finder, and worked on what sucked with it,
they would have been more productive.

Cheers!

Todd R. Warfel

Message first: a user experience consultancy
.--.==.--.==.--.==.--.==.--.==.--.==.--.
User Experience Architect
[P] [phone]
[E] ***@messagefirst.com
[w] http://www.messagefirst.com
.--.==.--.==.--.==.--.==.--.==.--.==.--.
In theory, theory and practice are the same.
In reality, they are not.

[Matt]

• It's harder to drill up the hierarchy once you pick your "Home
folder"
•• this could be overcome by dropping a "Users" folder in the left
panel
• Left panel takes up additional space that could be critical on
smaller screen
• Still a bit slow
• Removal of shortcut items from the top menu bar that were previously
there

You can put those up there, it's just not quite as intuitive. You need
to to add them to the middle of the items up there, then Customise
toolbar, then move them to where you want them.

I DON'T like Metal in the Finder but I love the new Aqua.

• Faster than previous versions
• More productive
• Closer to mental models than strict file/folder based solution
• Left panel can be hidden
• Users will quickly remap (mentally) the shortcut items from the top
menu bar to the left pane.
• Left pane allows for drag and drop of shortcut items w/o going in to
"Customize Toolbar" mode.

Due to the untidiness of my desktop I'm beginning to wonder if the
"Advanced Look and Feel" espoused by the Rhapsody User Experience
document may not have been a better idea. IIRC it was a panel down the
right hand side for disks and volumes - don't recall if you could add
other items...

The Network icon is now used which is nice. I wonder how they will
handle logging into servers and, perhaps more importantly, logging out
of servers.

M

(AppleInsider has an excellent forum with heaps of screens and movies
for those of us who can't see Panther on a day-to-day basis)

[steve harley]

Post by Todd R. Warfel
One thing we have to keep in mind about human and computer
interaction - computers systems were developed based on a file
structure and we've learned to adopt our thinking to that
methodology. Humans, on the other hand, don't typically operate
(think) in a file structure mode. [...] So, if we can abstract a
system out to better match our own mental models of things, then
computing can be easier, more productive, and less frustrating.

if Apple created a true OO filesystem with no requirement
for hierarchy, i'd love it and adapt my mental map rapidly,
though i assure you most of us would still organize it
somewhat hierarchically because that is a normal mode of
human conception, far predating computing

but unless Panther changes much more than what's been
reported, Finder is just applying some more half-baked OO
veneer.. the result is useful, but isn't robust enough to
supersede the hierarchical map

Post by Todd R. Warfel
* It's harder to drill up the hierarchy once you pick your "Home folder"
** this could be overcome by dropping a "Users" folder in the left panel

in most environments, "home" might be more useful than
"users".. but i think "overcome" is a bit strong -- this
doesn't solve the basic problem, just acts as a better
_hierarchical_ starting point.. and it does nothing for
those who have documents on several volumes.. it would work
better if "home" could be virtualized so it served as a
collection of all of a user's documents, wherever they might
be.. that's the kind of improvement that i'd really like to
see from Apple

Post by Todd R. Warfel
[...] * Left pane allows for drag and drop of shortcut items w/o
going in to "Customize Toolbar" mode.

where is the "pro" here? it seems that any shortcut that can
be dragged into the bucket can be dragged to the toolbar,
no? and it also seems that one can't customize the upper
portion of the bucket, whereas one can easily add and remove
volumes from the the toolbar.. in my case i often have
several disk images mounted which don't warrant inclusion in
the bucket.. i hope Apple will allow me to suppress them

[Matt]

Post by steve harley
if Apple created a true OO filesystem with no requirement
for hierarchy, i'd love it and adapt my mental map rapidly,
though i assure you most of us would still organize it
somewhat hierarchically because that is a normal mode of
human conception, far predating computing

They've done it before. Hmmm...soupy...

Post by steve harley
i hope Apple will allow me to suppress them

Nope, and if you try the cheerleaders will pop round to your house...

[Todd R. Warfel]

Post by steve harley
if Apple created a true OO filesystem with no requirement
for hierarchy, i'd love it and adapt my mental map rapidly,
though i assure you most of us would still organize it
somewhat hierarchically because that is a normal mode of
human conception, far predating computing

Absolutely. That isn't to say that some hierarchy wouldn't be used, or
that people don't use some level of hierarchy, as we do. However, it's
not the foundation of how we find things and interact with systems.

Post by steve harley
but unless Panther changes much more than what's been
reported, Finder is just applying some more half-baked OO
veneer.. the result is useful, but isn't robust enough to
supersede the hierarchical map

True. It's a step in the right direction, but not a full leap. You have
to make it a stepped transition in order to satisfy current users and
new users.

Post by steve harley
.. it would work
better if "home" could be virtualized so it served as a
collection of all of a user's documents, wherever they might
be.. that's the kind of improvement that i'd really like to
see from Apple

Now that's a great idea. You can do this with NetInfo, but it's a bit
tricky.


Cheers!

Todd R. Warfel

Message first: a user experience consultancy
.--.==.--.==.--.==.--.==.--.==.--.==.--.
User Experience Architect
[P] [phone]
[E] ***@messagefirst.com
[w] http://www.messagefirst.com
.--.==.--.==.--.==.--.==.--.==.--.==.--.
In theory, theory and practice are the same.
In reality, they are not.

[Michael Grant]

Post by Stewart Johnson
Although it might be easy
to get to a defined folder (Home ,Applications etc..) in the 'new' UI,
it has no feedback for where that folder is actually stored.

Isn't that the point? It's not supposed to "matter" where it's located in
the hierarchy. It's a step toward relieving the user of having to know the
structure of the file tree, the same way iTunes users can play their tunes
without having to worry about where the files are actually located. I have
mixed feelings about the concept, but it seems to be a response to some of
the unresolved issues of the GUI-atop-Unix structure of OS X, where large
parts of the file system are off limits to naïve users.

Michael

[Peter]

Post by Michael Grant

Post by Stewart Johnson
Although it might be easy
to get to a defined folder (Home ,Applications etc..) in the 'new' UI,
it has no feedback for where that folder is actually stored.

Isn't that the point? It's not supposed to "matter" where it's located in
the hierarchy. It's a step toward relieving the user of having to know the
structure of the file tree, the same way iTunes users can play their tunes
without having to worry about where the files are actually located. I have
mixed feelings about the concept, but it seems to be a response to some of
the unresolved issues of the GUI-atop-Unix structure of OS X, where large
parts of the file system are off limits to naïve users.
Michael

I'm reluctant to get into this discussion because I do not have
access to pre-release Panther but I can see where location can be a
very important aspect of a file.

I encountered it in fact with iTunes itself.

I store my extremely large collection of Music on an external FW HD.
I do this for several reasons.

1. because the collection is bigger than my start-up system HD.

2. because it means I can move the collection around with me.

3. because I then know where to perform backups from.

Occassionally I forget the FW HD is not attached, or not turned on
and I add CDs to my iTunes collection. Especially as I am now
progressively turning my collection into AAC files. My intent is to
keep installing them in the FW collection and, where updating the
file version, to actually replace the out of date file.

With the FW drive not attached iTunes neither warns me nor puts the
files where I expected them to be. I therefore have some files on one
drive and some on another as well as duplicate files on either, some
in different file versions. This is not something I am immediately
aware of nor can I easily remember at the point of discovering what
happened, which CDs I converted. The same thing happens with iPhoto
and all the new apps that have this file ordering model.

To correct the problem I DO need to know which files are where but
this may not be easy, as it is possible for files internally and
externally from iTunes to be labelled differently. I can only
individually track files inside iTunes one at a time which makes it
hard to compare and sort correct versions.

Confusing as it may be, it is not going to ruin me.

However when it comes to backup copies of client files and versioning
of jobs this same issue becomes much more a problem. InDesign, in
particular, seems to keep a personal backup of files for use in
"recovering" from crashes. When there are potentially more than one
of these plus the file/s I saved to my external FW drive all at
different stages of work but with the same name, how do I easily
untangle them unless I know the one at a particular location is both
the one I saved last and the one that InDesign is recovering to?

By all means give additional aids to shortcutting paths to files.
However the user has to have some comprehension where they are
actually stored or be at the mercy of hidden processes hiding subtle
errors that may rear their ugly heads only once it is too late and
the only solution is to start from scratch to correct all possible
omissions and changes.

P.

[mmalcolm crawford]

Post by Peter
To correct the problem I DO need to know which files are where but
this may not be easy, as it is possible for files internally and
externally from iTunes to be labelled differently.

In both iTunes and the current Finder (and I presume this will remain
true for Finder in Panther) you can find the location of a file with
Get Info (Command-i); the window or panel shows the path.

Post by Peter
By all means give additional aids to shortcutting paths to files.
However the user has to have some comprehension where they are
actually stored or be at the mercy of hidden processes hiding subtle
errors that may rear their ugly heads only once it is too late and the
only solution is to start from scratch to correct all possible
omissions and changes.

There is nothing in the discussion thus far which has suggested that
users will be unable to find where files are actually stored. All that
the new Finder appears to do is to give a temporary view of the
filesystem rooted at a point in the hierarchy rather than "/". It
appears that the user will always have access to the full view should
they wish.

mmalc

[Peter]

Post by mmalcolm crawford
In both iTunes and the current Finder (and I presume this will
remain true for Finder in Panther) you can find the location of a
file with Get Info (Command-i); the window or panel shows the path.

Yes that was what I was referring to. However it feels to me more
like having to refer to a separate cross index instead of a more
obvious in your face spacial positional tab, and it only works one
file at a time (inside iTunes)

Post by mmalcolm crawford
There is nothing in the discussion thus far which has suggested that
users will be unable to find where files are actually stored. All
that the new Finder appears to do is to give a temporary view of the
filesystem rooted at a point in the hierarchy rather than "/". It
appears that the user will always have access to the full view
should they wish.

I confess this part I don't follow. What purpose does this serve that
an alias doesn't already achieve? How obviously different will 2
identically named locations appear so that, in a moment of
distraction, files aren't incorrectly moved or opened?

P.

[mmalcolm crawford]

Post by mmalcolm crawford
In both iTunes and the current Finder (and I presume this will remain
true for Finder in Panther) you can find the location of a file with
Get Info (Command-i); the window or panel shows the path.

Yes that was what I was referring to. However it feels to me more like
having to refer to a separate cross index instead of a more obvious in
your face spacial positional tab, and it only works one file at a time
(inside iTunes)

If you want to know where something is in the hierarchy, then (just as
you do now) open a window rooted at "/". iTunes != Finder...

Post by mmalcolm crawford
There is nothing in the discussion thus far which has suggested that
users will be unable to find where files are actually stored. All
that the new Finder appears to do is to give a temporary view of the
filesystem rooted at a point in the hierarchy rather than "/". It
appears that the user will always have access to the full view should
they wish.

I confess this part I don't follow. What purpose does this serve that
an alias doesn't already achieve?

It's not an alias, it's a view. Perhaps you should suspend further
comment until you've used it...?

How obviously different will 2 identically named locations appear so
that, in a moment of distraction, files aren't incorrectly moved or
opened?

As different as two identically-named locations do currently, I'd
guess...

mmalc

[Jesús Díaz Blanco]

I'm reluctant to get into this discussion because I do not have access
to pre-release Panther

Then why even get into it?

Reading your mail, you already started to spread opinions based on
false impressions (that you never had in the first place).

j.

[Peter]

Post by Jesús Díaz Blanco

Post by Peter
I'm reluctant to get into this discussion because I do not have
access to pre-release Panther

Then why even get into it?
Reading your mail, you already started to spread opinions based on
false impressions (that you never had in the first place).
j.

Such as?

P.

[Jared ''Danger'' Earle]

Post by Peter
With the FW drive not attached iTunes neither warns me nor puts the
files where I expected them to be. I therefore have some files on one
drive and some on another as well as duplicate files on either, some
in different file versions.

You can work around this using mount points and read/write permissions.
I'll leave it as an exercise 'for the reader' as to how to do this
exactly as I don't have a drive to test it on and produce a HOWTO.

[steve harley]

Post by Peter
To correct the problem I DO need to know which files are where but
this may not be easy, as it is possible for files internally and
externally from iTunes to be labelled differently. I can only
individually track files inside iTunes one at a time which makes it
hard to compare and sort correct versions.

once you've found just one of the files that aren't on the
external drive, i think you've found them all.. then just
move the lot to the external drive and either reinitialize
your iTunes database, or add the moved files and run a
script to delete non-found files

iTunes is a very rich non-hierarchical browser environment,
but it falls down badly for file management unless you work
on one volume and like the way it chooses to organize
files.. but for an example of a similarly powerful browser
that does file management better, see iView Media Pro.. IVMP
includes a pretty good command set for managing diverse file
locations *and* browsing independently of those locations

[Peter]

Post by mmalcolm crawford
In both iTunes and the current Finder (and I presume this will
remain true for Finder in Panther) you can find the location of a
file with Get Info (Command-i); the window or panel shows the path.

...snip...
... different will 2 identically named locations appear so that, in
a moment of distraction, files aren't incorrectly moved or opened?
P.

The differences can be as important as those between the amputation
instruction on the surgeon's hospital database and the "NOT THIS ONE"
hand written in felt pen on the patient's limb.

P.

[Michael Grant]

Due to the untidiness of my desktop I'm beginning to wonder if the "Advanced
Look and Feel" espoused by the Rhapsody User Experience document may not have
been a better idea. IIRC it was a panel down the right hand side for disks and
volumes - don't recall if you could add other items...

I get the feeling that the UI team is thrashing around a bit and still
hasn't really got a firm handle on file system usability. The Panther Finder
left panel seems to be duplicating some of the functionality that was
originally supposed to be supplied by the Dock. The lingering weakness of
the Dock is the way it shoehorns the display of running apps together with
file selection functions (files/folders and permanent apps) and minimized
windows. Why does the Dock treat folders differently from Finder
windows--aren't they really the same thing? At least they got rid of
"Docklings". Putting file/folder navigation functions somewhere besides the
Dock is a step in the right direction, but it's one small step on a long
road.

Michael

[Michael Grant]

Post by steve harley
if Apple created a true OO filesystem with no requirement
for hierarchy, i'd love it and adapt my mental map rapidly,
though i assure you most of us would still organize it
somewhat hierarchically because that is a normal mode of
human conception, far predating computing

The ability to organize in hierarchies is important (does anyone else find
it really irritating that the add bookmark menu in Safari doesn't have
submenus?), but the problem is that right now everything has to go into the
same hierarchy. Aliases or links give us a little more flexibility, but not
nearly enough. What's more, much of the directory hierarchy is organized
according to the needs of the system, not the user.

Michael

[Michael Grant]

€ Left pane allows for drag and drop of shortcut items w/o going in to
"Customize Toolbar" mode.

Err, so does the current toolbar.
Michael

[LuKreme (List User Kreme)]

at 20030803, 03:22 -0600, they whom i call LuKreme (List User Kreme)

Post by LuKreme (List User Kreme)
Where the folder is actually stored?

to me that's crucial, but am i hearing correctly? it sounds
like if you click an item in the "bucket", you get a display
to the right of everything from that point _down_, but you
can't navigate _up_.

You CAN navigate up, you just can't scroll the columns right. If you
pant to move up from an item in the sidebar you use the "path" widget
at the top of the window in the toolbar (or you use Command-Up).

[steve harley]

You CAN navigate up, you just can't scroll the columns [left]. If
you pant to move up from an item in the sidebar you use the "path"
widget at the top of the window in the toolbar (or you use
Command-Up).

i guess it works the way i supposed then.. the fact that one
can navigate up with additional work is expected, and
doesn't allay my disappointment.. i often use a landmark
*expecting* to navigate up, and the way Finder currently
jumps to landmarks in the toolbar (when using a wide window
in column view), upward items are usually instantly at hand,
no further action (even scrolling) required

so the items in the bucket can't be considered landmarks
like toolbar items.. they'll act like psuedo-top-level
items, or "containers".. i'll wait to see if the convenience
outweighs the constriction of the paradigm.. my guess is a
lot of people will be wanting a button to "show context"

[LuKreme (List User Kreme)]

and it also seems that one can't customize the upper portion of the
bucket, whereas one can easily add and remove volumes from the the
toolbar..

That's not right, you CAN disable items in the top portion. or at
least I assume that's what the checkboxes in the screenshot I saw meant.

[steve harley]

Post by LuKreme (List User Kreme)

and it also seems that one can't customize the upper portion of the
bucket, whereas one can easily add and remove volumes from the the
toolbar..

That's not right, you CAN disable items in the top portion. or at
least I assume that's what the checkboxes in the screenshot I saw meant.

okay, i found this image, which appears to show control at a
gross level:

<Loading Image...>

while this is helpful, i would rather that mounted disk
images were not displayed in the sidebar.. i'll probably
settle for just turning off the whole upper portion

[LuKreme (List User Kreme)]

On Sunday, Aug 3, 2003, at 14:51 Canada/Mountain, LuKreme (List User

Post by LuKreme (List User Kreme)
You CAN navigate up, you just can't scroll the columns right.

durrrr

LEFT.

[John Siracusa]

does anyone else find it really irritating that the add bookmark menu in
Safari doesn't have submenus?

Hey, at least you can *create* submenus. Why oh why can I still not create
menu separators in Safari's bookmarks menu? <gnashing of teeth>

-John

[Michael Grant]

Post by John Siracusa

does anyone else find it really irritating that the add bookmark menu in
Safari doesn't have submenus?

Hey, at least you can *create* submenus.

Not in the Add Bookmarks menu (the one that comes up when you click the
"plus" button)--unless you know something I don't.

Michael

[John Siracusa]

Post by Michael Grant

Post by John Siracusa

does anyone else find it really irritating that the add bookmark menu in
Safari doesn't have submenus?

Hey, at least you can *create* submenus.

Not in the Add Bookmarks menu (the one that comes up when you click the
"plus" button)--unless you know something I don't.

Right, but at least you can create them *somewhere*...unlike menu separators
which We Do Not Yet Possess the Technology to Implement, apparently :P

-John

[Dan.Gaters]

unlike menu separators which We Do Not Yet Possess the Technology to
Implement, apparently :P

That, of course, is just your OPINION since you haven't produced any
documentation as to what Apple has or has not. After all, Apple could have
the technology but might be hiding it until Safari 1.1, so as not to tip off
Microsoft.
:)

d*g

[John Siracusa]

Post by Dan.Gaters

unlike menu separators which We Do Not Yet Possess the Technology to
Implement, apparently :P

That, of course, is just your OPINION since you haven't produced any
documentation as to what Apple has or has not. After all, Apple could have
the technology but might be hiding it until Safari 1.1, so as not to tip off
Microsoft. :)

Yes, I heard the Safari Bookmarks Menu Separator Skunk Works (SBMSSW)
is, at this very moment, attempting to recover lost knowledge from the
ruins of the NCSA Mosaic source code repository...

-John

[Dan.Gaters]

Post by John Siracusa
Yes, I heard the Safari Bookmarks Menu Separator Skunk Works (SBMSSW)
is, at this very moment, attempting to recover lost knowledge from the
ruins of the NCSA Mosaic source code repository...

Again you're projecting YOUR recollection of what's clearly hearsay, and
once again, your are dead wrong. Apple went not to Mosaic but to the
original Spyglass code base. What's not clear is whether this still belongs
to Spyglass or to Microsoft that briefly licensed it, and, of course, if the
possible application of any such code on a Unix system like OS X would upset
SCO. I wish you'd get your facts straight before posting such rubbish.
:)

On another note, I seem to remember seeing a screenshot of Safari among the
recent Panther reports that showed a space as a separator, but to provide
anything more concrete I'd have to acknowledge that I frequent rumor sites.
So there's a chance you might get your wish.

d*g

[Jesús Díaz Blanco]

Didn't hear the rimshot, but hah hah hah and stuff.

err...

Could you please take the Stan & Oliver routine to
alt.comedy.not.really.funny.at.all? Or are you waiting for the third
Stooge to join in?

j.

Post by Dan.Gaters

Post by John Siracusa
Yes, I heard the Safari Bookmarks Menu Separator Skunk Works (SBMSSW)
is, at this very moment, attempting to recover lost knowledge from the
ruins of the NCSA Mosaic source code repository...

Again you're projecting YOUR recollection of what's clearly hearsay, and
once again, your are dead wrong. Apple went not to Mosaic but to the
original Spyglass code base. What's not clear is whether this still belongs
to Spyglass or to Microsoft that briefly licensed it, and, of course, if the
possible application of any such code on a Unix system like OS X would upset
SCO. I wish you'd get your facts straight before posting such rubbish.
:)
On another note, I seem to remember seeing a screenshot of Safari among the
recent Panther reports that showed a space as a separator, but to provide
anything more concrete I'd have to acknowledge that I frequent rumor sites.
So there's a chance you might get your wish.
d*g
_______________________________________________
MacOSX-talk mailing list
http://www.omnigroup.com/mailman/listinfo/macosx-talk

[Karl Kuehn]

If you happen to have a 'certain version of a certain OS that does not
yet exist' then have a look in the /Developer/Applications folder...
there might be something there to interest Python developers...

Karl Kuehn

Post by Mark F. Murphy
So... anyone have any comments on why Apple is doing Python bindings
for Quartz in Panther?
I also heard that Python is used to do some stuff with the print panel.
Is Apple warming up to using Python as a scripting engine?