Nekochan Net

a sysadmin @ a post house mentioned Xfile the other day. way too much for me, but you guys may like it

what's people beef with finder? I have tiger installed in some machines and finder does exactly is supposed to do and it's way faster than search in vista.

Thanks for your thoughts. Please point out to the others that the
Xfile Test Drive is free and runs *for a very long time*. It only
costs something if you need more features.

There seem to be some people in that thread who don't understand why
their good old Finder won't 'do it'. Please point them to our
articles.

In particular we have an extensive (and ongoing) series on file
management. This is the latest instalment with links to all the
previous articles.

http://rixstep.com/2/20101228,00.shtml

Part Four is a bibliography of resources.

http://rixstep.com/2/20101102,00.shtml

Thanks for writing. All the best.

FWIW.

http://blog.kozubik.com/john_kozubik/20 ... e-ion.html

'You can sum it up nicely with the inability to maximize a Window
(that is, without manually dragging it to the corners with the mouse
in a one-shot attempt to cover the whole screen).'

This is completely illiterate. 'Maximising' ('zooming') is by default
'the entire screen'. Watch Firefox. Firefox does this because Firefox
is illiterate.

Intelligent applications like Safari (and believe it, in this respect
Safari is very intelligent) zoom only to make as much content as
possible visible. *This is not easy.*

Safari has several windows that do this - the browser window of course
but also the activities window.

Cocoa has 'delegate calls' which can be implemented for the delegate
of any window to change the default effect of a zoom. Some
applications do this (we have a few that do) and some do not.

The key is that it's controllable by the application *and has nothing
to do with the system in general*. A contrary observation - such as
nauseatingly repeated by Walt Mossberg and such as the above author -
is merely a giveaway that the person so observing hasn't observed
enough. Or perhaps in Walt's case that the poor dude isn't so terribly
clued in. ;)

Zooming to fill an entire screen with a single window smacks of
Neanderthal today what with resolutions of 2000x1000 or more. It's
nonsensical. And Cocoa gives the apps the choice - unlike other more
'primitive' platforms.

FWIW. Cheers.

FWIW.

http://blog.kozubik.com/john_kozubik/20 ... e-ion.html

'You can sum it up nicely with the inability to maximize a Window
(that is, without manually dragging it to the corners with the mouse
in a one-shot attempt to cover the whole screen).'

This is completely illiterate. 'Maximising' ('zooming') is by default
'the entire screen'. Watch Firefox. Firefox does this because Firefox
is illiterate.

Intelligent applications like Safari (and believe it, in this respect
Safari is very intelligent) zoom only to make as much content as
possible visible. *This is not easy.*

Zooming to fill an entire screen with a single window smacks of
Neanderthal today what with resolutions of 2000x1000 or more. It's
nonsensical. And Cocoa gives the apps the choice - unlike other more
'primitive' platforms.

He has missed the point entirely. Nobody is suggesting that you maximize every window to fit your screen - in fact, you might never want to do that. The point is, you _can't_ do it. The fact that you cannot maximize a window properly, without using a mouse, is a great example of the braindead nature of the Mac UI.

...


Fantastic. Really - great. The problem is that is your ONLY option. If for whatever reason you want to max a window, you can't (without a lot of inefficient, silly mouse movement that ends up being imprecise anyway).

On every platform other than Mac OS and BeOS, maximize is your ONLY option, so what's your point? I have yet to find any GUI that offers both maximize and zoom as distinct features, so criticizing Mac OS X for only including one of them is disingenuous.