# Windows Explorer vs Mac OS X Finder



## gxsaurav (Jun 12, 2007)

Well, this was coming from many days & since now WWDC is over with finder not having any compelling new feature its about time I post it here.

 Microsoft completely overhauled Windows Explorer with Windows Vista. Not only the look is changed but the way you manage your files is also changed. It is a very powerful file browser & manager now which makes it very easy to manage files.

  On first look, this is how the default Windows Explorer looks like. My Computer of Windows is now replaced with just “Computer” which shows all your fixed, removable & optical drives at one place.

*img476.imageshack.us/img476/7586/explorermaindo9.jpg

 The default look is not only enhanced but also it is logically more unified. You no longer get the classic menu bar by default, & come to think about it, when was the last time you used it? You can still get the Menu bar by pressing & releasing the keyboard Alt key.

  The Explorer is divided into parts such as address bar, search box, favorite links & the viewport area.

  The address bar is no longer like the one in Windows XP. It is a breadcrumb bar & from one folder you can jump to any other folder on the path backward using the breadcrumb arrows. It makes it easier to go back as many steps as you want. However you cannot drag a file to address bar, hover over an arrow & open that folder with drag selected. You can instead simply do a Cut & go to that folder & Paste.

*img480.imageshack.us/img480/6332/breadcrumbwn7.jpg



  In Windows XP, clicking on the address bar pull down menu used to give a display of all the drives & navigation folders which was a really good feature. It is omitted in Vista & now the address bar pull down menu shows a history of some recently opened folders & URL links. More like IE 7’s address bar. The Windows XP method was a good feature which was removed for no reason.

*img463.imageshack.us/img463/1127/addressbarse2.jpg

 Below the address bar is the Tasks toolbar. This is a context sensitive toolbar which changes according the folder you are in like if you click on an image, the icons change to tasks which will assist you in doing picture related stuff. If you select a Video it will offer you video related tasks such as making a DVD or playing it in WMP11 etc.

  You can navigate back or forward using the usually identifiable back & forward buttons which are on left side of address bar.

*img473.imageshack.us/img473/3905/backforwardwx3.jpg


Explorer now has search integrated in it. You can search for anything from anywhere in Explorer. Just write the word & Windows Explorer will display it in search instantly or if the files are not indexed, a bit slow. It searches in the folder in which you are currently & the index. Search is a big feature in Windows Vista & makes it easy to find a particular file.

*img473.imageshack.us/img473/7892/searchov5.jpg

 [FONT=&quot]Now let us come to the favorite links sidebar. Well, nothing much to talk about. Just drag the folder you want to add to this favorite link sidebar & it will make a shortcut. One shortcoming though that you cannot increase the icon or font size of Sidebar, but it is possible using registry hacks. The Explorer Tree navigation is below the favorite bar & is displayed when you click on “Folders” button.

*img482.imageshack.us/img482/5405/sidebargu9.jpg

[/FONT]  At the bottom is the File details pane which is an enhancement of the Windows XP shell style info pane. Just click on a file & it will show all the possible info it can about that file such as author, date etc. You can also edit the file description depending upon which file it is, like if it is a Word 2007 document you can easily change the author etc.

*img482.imageshack.us/img482/1732/fileinfouq6.jpg

 These were the basic Windows Explorer definition in Vista. Now coming to how explorer makes like easier.

In Windows Vista, by default the Pictures, Music, Movies, Contact etc are stored in the users own folder. However he can simply change the location of these folders to somewhere else like some other partition & still refer to them at the original location. Suppose I have my music on my E:\Drive. All I have to do is to go my user’s folder, right click on the “Music” Folder & change its location to that of E:\ drive. Now all Windows application whether third party or Windows integrated will refer to the new location of E:\Drive. You are not forced to use Windows the default way, you can use it the way you want. You can change the location of Movies Folder, documents & pictures just like this. This comes in handy if you save your data on another hard disk or partition.

  You also have some saved searches called “Live Folders”. These are virtual folders which are more like containers which refer to files complying with specific criteria. For example, in you user folder there is a folder names “Searches” which houses some commonly used search terms like “All recent files, made in the last 2 days” & other criteria’s like this. You can also make your own live folder using the Windows Search. Just perform a search & save it. For example, if I search for all files created since Monday to today all I have to do is to go to search panel, select the criteria & save it as a search. Since all the files are indexed, any new file created will be added to this live folder easily. You can simply drag this Live folder to favorite links sidebar for easier access.

*img470.imageshack.us/img470/6981/searchesce6.jpg

 One thing enhanced in Windows Vista is the inbuilt preview in Explorer. Now it is called Windows Preview. By default Windows shows thumbnails of all the files it has in a folder such as videos or images. You can simply turn on the Preview function from the organize button found at the top toolbar & now you will be greeted by a simple preview panel in the side of explorer in which you can see the preview of any file. Windows Explorer shows preview of many files such as Video or Audio or Images right there in Explorer itself. You can even play videos in here without opening any media player. The file types that Windows can preview can be extended using plug-ins available. Recently with the release of Adobe Acrobat 8.1 you can preview PDF files in explorer too. You can preview just about any possible file in Explorer as long as the plug-in is installed including but not limited to Microsoft Word, Excel & PowerPoint Slides.

*img390.imageshack.us/img390/8164/previeem5.jpg

 Next to the organize button is the “Views” button which will resize the icons or thumbnails on Explorer in real time. It shows the content of the files up to a preview size of 256X256 pixels. You can easily use a bit display with high resolution & see what a file contains without even opening it. This is more like a Live Thumbnail.

*img386.imageshack.us/img386/5879/bigiconskz9.jpg

 There are different types of views in the Explorer viewport area such as the standard icon view as well as tiles or details or list views. One new enhancement in Explorer is that if you are in a folder having many files then you can simply click on the column at the top of viewport area to sort the files according to criteria as well as show only the files matching particular criteria. For example, you can click on the “Type” tab & select to show only JPG & Word documents & it will hide all the files in that folder other than those matching these file types. You can similarly click on the “Date” tab & select to show the files from a following date only. It makes navigation easier if you need to copy all the image files from a folder where there are many different files, just select to show image files then copy all the files which show up. You can even stack the files & save it as a “Live Folder”

*img386.imageshack.us/img386/2756/sortbytypefc3.jpg


 Using the tasks toolbar you can also use the inbuilt CD Burning feature of Windows Vista to burn all the files you require. Help is available right through the tasks toolbar.

  Let us come to the Windows shell. The Start menu is further streamlined for use with new Windows Vista technologies such as search & live previews. You can search for all files or anything right there from the Start menu “Instant Search” itself.

  Alt+tab which now called FlipTab also shows preview of all Windows you have open. You can directly click on any thumbnail to jump to that particular window. Windows has a Tasks based approach towards navigation of open windows on screen. If you have five internet explorer Windows open then they show up as five separate entities & you can jump to anyone directly using FlipTab.

*img454.imageshack.us/img454/4455/fliptabrd3.jpg

 Taskbar now shows small preview of the Windows opened just by hovering the mouse over them. It also groups similar windows together which you can navigate to either by clicking on the taskbar button or using FlipTab.

*img474.imageshack.us/img474/5390/taskbarpreviewts7.jpg        

*img469.imageshack.us/img469/9528/taskbargroupinghi6.jpg

 You can customise a folder’s icon by right clicking on it, go to properties, customise tab & select an Icon.

  Due to new technologies such as Volume Shadow copy, Windows can go to a previous version of your file if you have overwritten it with a new one. After that you can save the old version alongside the new version. If you deleted a file accidently, well….just use Windows backup & it will be there.

  Windows Explorer supports full drag & drop. Not only that, if you have multiple files & folders in a folder, you don’t need to keep pressing Control key to select multiple files. Just turn on Checkbox from Tool->Folder Option & now you can simply click on these checkbox & drag & drop or cut-paste the selection at once. When you drag the files together, Explorer shows you a count of selected files.

*img490.imageshack.us/img490/7940/checkboxselectionwf5.jpg

 Windows Explorer is just that, Windows Explorer. It lets you manage your files the way you want it to. You are in control.

  [FONT=&quot]The Finder part is something I would urge Arya to write, because if I do it, then it will be called a biased article. *Both Explorer & Finder cater to the need of File management, it’s just that Explorer is Kick ass & highly extendable*[/FONT]


----------



## aryayush (Jun 12, 2007)

I did not bother reading the whole "article" but I noticed one comment towards the end that made me laugh my ass off:





			
				gx_saurav said:
			
		

> Windows Explorer supports full drag & drop.



 Oh really? WOW! I never knew that. So, let's see - does it open a folder when you drag something over it, so that you can move further into the hierarchy?
No? Oh, but you just said that it "supports full drag & drop". Of course, you were lying as usual.

I am sure the whole post is full of random lies such as this one.


----------



## gxsaurav (Jun 12, 2007)

aryayush said:
			
		

> does it open a folder when you drag something over it, so that you can move further into the hierarchy?


Nope, that is a *Apple Patented method of Spring loaded folders.* A concept UI for something better in Windows is on its way



> No? Oh, but you just said that it "supports full drag & drop". Of course, you were lying as usual.
> 
> I am sure the whole post is full of random lies such as this one.


Do read the post once, thats why I gave screenshots . I hope those lines which u call lies don't come out to be Finder pwning lines 

Do come with your article about Finder


----------



## gxsaurav (Jun 12, 2007)

Lolz...you expect him to know how windows works.

Arya, here is Sidebar drag for u

*img486.imageshack.us/img486/6738/sidebardragpn0.jpg

There is a saying which fits here.

"Don't argue with an Idiot, they first bring you to there level & then beat you by there experience"

I don't wanna argue with arya & reach his level of knowledge & experience


----------



## Zeeshan Quireshi (Jun 12, 2007)

Of course explorer beats Finder Hands down .

my biggest gripe with finder: it does not show full file path so yo have to manually switch view in finder n then go all the way to the root to see where the file is present .


----------



## gxsaurav (Jun 12, 2007)

Yo fellow members, public support for Arya writing a finder review. I don't wanna do it cos then Macboys will not agree to it, obviously. So let the Mac genius write it who thinks he knows about Macs after using it for 7 months


----------



## anandk (Jun 12, 2007)

Cool review !!!


----------



## sam_1710 (Jun 12, 2007)

wooowww... cool review!! .. 
dint know bout the last part!! thanks fot dat!! *www.thelair.it/forum/style_emoticons/thelair/hail.gif


----------



## blackleopard92 (Jun 12, 2007)

aryayush said:
			
		

> Oh really? WOW! I never knew that. So, let's see - does it open a folder when you drag something over it, so that you can move further into the hierarchy?


yes it does. except the fact that instead of we use left hand folder tree for this use. it's better than scrolling the whole window to find the required folder, and doing it again and again. in fact, using folder view(in lower left pane) u can drag items to a subdirectory located in a different drive too.it's more sophisticated and simple


----------



## gxsaurav (Jun 12, 2007)

blackleopard92 said:
			
		

> yes it does. except the fact that instead of we use left hand folder tree for this use. it's better than scrolling the whole window to find the required folder, and doing it again and again. in fact, using folder view(in lower left pane) u can drag items to a subdirectory located in a different drive too.it's more sophisticated and simple


 
Hey cool blackleopard, I didn't know about this trick. Just compleated making another UI concept for Vista. Posting in a while.

Fellow members, those who want to see this in action, this is how the tree drag feature works in vista. *Just download the video*


----------



## blackpearl (Jun 12, 2007)

Cool review.


----------



## gxsaurav (Jun 12, 2007)

Looks like I will have to do Finder review too....damn, this review is so biased without any macboy taking part


----------



## iMav (Jun 12, 2007)

gx_saurav said:
			
		

> Yo fellow members, public support for Arya writing a finder review. I don't wanna do it cos then Macboys will not agree to it, obviously. So let the Mac genius write it who thinks he knows about Macs after using it for 7 months


 dude digg this ... its 1 of the most comprehensive reviews iv seen in a lot of time .. amazing review ... btw il do a finder review if arya doesnt do it before me ... btw finder is no competition to explorer by any means its a very basic 80s genereation explorer


----------



## gxsaurav (Jun 12, 2007)

iMav , you forgot.

Mac OS X Finder : It looks good & polished......................................thats it.

Can it manage my files? : Yes

Can it work the way I want : Nope


----------



## iMav (Jun 12, 2007)

kaam shivaji style looks abhishek bachan style .... bole toh finder of os x


----------



## goobimama (Jun 12, 2007)

I want just downloaded a file using my favourite web browser IE. Say I've set it to save to desktop. Now I want to move that file to somewhere in the D Drive > something folder > something else folder. I have to *cut* the file. Then I have to open explorer cause there's no spring loaded folders. Navigate using that sidebar. Paste the file. Close explorer.

On the Mac I just drag it to the HD icon, or whatever other folder I've left on the desktop springs open a window, drag it to the desired location and it automatically closes the window. 

---------

One more complaint I have against explorer. Even when dragging a file within explorer, to navigate to the bottom of the 'tree' is such a pain as you have to go through all the explanded folders. Then at the opportune moment, just as you release the file to be moved, it scrolls a bit down making you transfer in the wrong place. And we all know how long Vista takes to cancel a file transfer...

Extra Large icons in Vista vs CoverFlow in OS X

- Making the previews bigger is closer to in Finder than going up to change the icon size
- It shows a preview of all files including Word, Excel, PDF, movies, and has the option of expanding this list of supported files by adding some kind of plugins. You can also play the movies or flip through pages of a document right there. 
Explorer on the other hand can only preview Images, Video and PDF.
- While dragging a file, if Vista can generate a thumbnail of the icon, as shown in gx's screenshot, it sort of covers the mouse so its very difficult to see where exactly you are dragging a file to. OS X on the other hand, fades the icons along with their file names while showing you a prominent mouse pointer.

The rest of the comparisons are there in Tiger itself....


----------



## Desi-Tek.com (Jun 12, 2007)

only problem with vista (explorer ) is it take ages to delete large file for example if u want to delete 1gb file it will take more than 5 min to delete that file specially if the file is distributed in many folders (subdirectory) eg folder of games .  i hope microsoft will fix it in service pack 1


----------



## gxsaurav (Jun 12, 2007)

> Then I have to open explorer cause *there's no spring loaded folders.* Navigate using that sidebar. Paste the file. Close explorer.


Yup,* Spring Loaded folders is a technology for which Apple holds a patent due to which it cannot be used in Vista.* Deal with it....it is not Microsoft's fault that Apple patented "A method to drag & drop a file"


> One more complaint I have against explorer. Even when dragging a file within explorer, to navigate to the bottom of the 'tree' is such a pain as you have to go through all the explanded folders. Then at the opportune moment, just as you release the file to be moved, it scrolls a bit down making you transfer in the wrong place.


I wonder why u r facing the problem, I don't face it here. Then again, Vista's doesn't search for files there too while it does here & in kenshin's case. Goobi Vista hates u 



> - Making the previews bigger is closer to in Finder than going up to change the icon size


Already there in Windows. It only plays when you want it to play.


> - It shows a preview of all files including Word, Excel, PDF, movies, and has the option of expanding this list of supported files by adding some kind of plugins. You can also play the movies or flip through pages of a document right there.


Yup, everything is already possible in Windows Vista Explorer.



> Explorer on the other hand can only preview Images, Video and PDF.


And anything for which you have a plugin installed. Coverflow in Finder is just a rip of Windows Preview + Windows XP Filmstrip view



> - While dragging a file, if Vista can generate a thumbnail of the icon, as shown in gx's screenshot, it sort of covers the mouse so its very difficult to see where exactly you are dragging a file to.


Subjective, it does makes a pile of icons, yes....but a cursor is still visible. But ya I do agree that the pile should be less opaque.

Goobi, why don't u write a complete review of Finder.



> only problem with vista (explorer ) is it take ages to delete large file for example if u want to delete 1gb file it will take more than 5 min to delete that file specially if the file is distributed in many folders (subdirectory) eg folder of games .  i hope microsoft will fix it in service pack 1



This is already fixed. Download the Update


----------



## aryayush (Jun 12, 2007)

gx_saurav said:
			
		

> And anything for which you have a plugin installed. Coverflow in Finder is just a rip of Windows Preview + Windows XP Filmstrip view


WHAT! Come again. LOL! 

Who is the poster... oh, you again! Carry on with the bullshit.

Cover Flow is a copy of something in Windows!!! Ha! Ha! Ha! 


BTW, I read most of your review but I couldn't see anything that is there in Explorer and lacking in the Finder. I'll do a check-list for you right now, just wait...


----------



## gxsaurav (Jun 12, 2007)

aryayush said:
			
		

> WHAT! Come again. LOL!
> 
> Cover Flow is a copy of something in Windows!!! Ha! Ha! Ha!


Oh, I guess U never used Windows XP either. Then how will you know about Filmstrip view of Windows XP Pictures folder which used to show preview of images & videos like this.

*z.about.com/d/windows/1/0/p/2/-/-/pictures.gif

And Windows Explorer in Vista is already showing preview of many file formats out there since 8 months. Obviously a blind ignorent macboy like u won't understand.

Fellow members I ask you. Isn't coverflow showing preview right there in Explorer is something Windows has been doing since XP? as shown in the pic above



> BTW, I read most of your review but *I couldn't see anything that is there in Explorer and lacking in the Finder. *I'll do a check-list for you right now, just wait...


How can I compare , I did wanted to write a finder article ....but then macboys would have called it biased, plz post the article here yourself. For starters

* 1) Finder has no Cut option 

2) Finder has no address bar

3) Finder has no breadcrumb bar

4) Finder has no option to show just a particular file type in Viewport

5) Finder has no custom icon spacing.

6) You cannot resize any windows from any side. Just the south west*


----------



## aryayush (Jun 12, 2007)

Breadcrumb navigation - Check.
Context sensitive toolbar - Nope.
Back and Forward - Check.
Integrated search - Check.
Sidebar - Check.
Tree navigation - Check.
File details - Check.
Using a different folder for personal data - Check.
Live folders - Check.
In-built Preview - Check.
Live scaling of icons and thumbnails - Check.
256x256 icons - Nope.
Sort according to different criteria - Check.
Hide particular filetypes - Nope.
CD burning - Check.
Live previews in Flip - Nope.
Live preview in the taskbar - Check.
Group similar windows - Check.
Customising icons - Check.
Previous versions - Nope.
Full drag and drop - Check.
Selection checkboxes - Nope.

From your review, Finder lacks in the following areas:
It has no context sensitive toolbar, massive icons the size of my palm, cannot hide particular filetypes when viewing them in a folder, does not show live previews of windows when using 'Command + Tab', does not allow you to revert to previous versions of files and has no selection checkboxes for difficult selection.

All the points in your previous post are wrong, it has the cut option, has the functionality of the address bar and much better bread crumb navigation than Explorer. I listed the fourth point. The fifth one is such a moot option that I wouldn't give it the time of day but for your sake, I am including it in the list anyway.

As for what Finder has that lacks in Explorer, I could go on and on.

01. Spring loaded folders. (*Update*: Though it is not as advanced as in Mac OS X, sakumar79 pointed out that this feature does exist. Sorry for the goof-up!)
*02. Column view.
03. Dragging stuff (such as text, links and images) from webpages directly onto the Finder without going through the 'Save As...' routine.*
04. Show in Finder. (*Update*: Though it is not as advanced as in Mac OS X, gx_saurav pointed out that this feature does exist. Sorry for the goof-up!)
*05. Setting pictures as icons.
06. Colour labeling.
07. Smart aliases. (The shortcuts in Windows are dumb.)
08. Adding applications to the toolbar. (You can add an application you frequently use and drop files onto the icon to open them with that application.)
09. Simple view. (A basic view without the fancy options. Very useful.)
10. Dragging folders from the toolbar.
11. Resizing the sidebar. (It proportionately increases and decreases the size of the icons.)
12. Dragging files/folders from the Finder into navigation dialog boxes (such as the Open and Save dialogs) to directly navigate to that position.
13. Very good results view when using the built-in Spotlight powered search.
14. Previewing Adobe's document formats (without installing anything else).
15. Searching within PDFs.
16. Long names of items are better truncated.
17. Have a particular file always open with a particular application without affecting the other files with that extension.*
18. Dragging files onto applications to open them with that application. (Extremely limited support in Windows.) (*Update*: Though it is not as advanced as in Mac OS X, gx_saurav pointed out that this feature does exist. Sorry for the goof-up!)
*19. Though not a feature of the Finder, the Dock is better for launching applications than the 'Quick Launch' area of the taskbar.
20. Flip does not allow you to close any of the windows unless you switch to them first.*
21. Very quick and easy duplication of files (even applications). (*Update*: Though it is not as advanced as in Mac OS X, gx_saurav pointed out that this feature does exist. Sorry for the goof-up!)
*22. The desktop picture can be set to rotate at regular intervals (with a beautiful dissolve effect). It is also integrated with iPhoto.
23. Pressing 'Command' and leaving a file aligns it to grid (without having to turn the option on for every file in the folder).
24. Hot corners. The corners of the screen can be set to trigger events such as Exposé, the Dashboard and screensaver.
25. Exposé. The ability to view all open windows in a neat and intuitive manner.
26. Exposé. Allows you to switch between active windows of particular applications without having to bother with the other windows.
27. Exposé. Shows the desktop in a way better manner.
28. Exposé. Spring loaded windows allow you to drag and drop stuff among them.
29. When command tabbing between applications, you can use keyboard shortcuts to quit or hide them too.
30. AppleScript and Automator support.
31. Secure empty trash.
32. Better screensavers (sorry, couldn't resist ).
33. When you are downloading something in Safari, the icon in the Finder shows a live progress indicator.
34. You can even relocate and rename busy files in the Finder. For example, you can rename a Word file even when it is open in TextEdit and you are editing it and you can move a file anywhere even when it has not been completely downloaded. Nothing will be interrupted.*

I am sure there are other features too that I am missing here. When you say something sensible like WMP kicks the ass of iTunes and QuickTime Player, I'll completely agree with you. Who you post **** such as the posts in this thread... well, this is the best I can do.


----------



## gxsaurav (Jun 12, 2007)

> From your review, Finder lacks in the following areas:
> It has no context sensitive toolbar, massive icons the size of my palm, cannot hide particular filetypes when viewing them in a folder, does not show live previews of windows when using 'Command + Tab', does not allow you to revert to previous versions of files and has no selection checkboxes for difficult selection.





> All the points in your previous post are wrong,


ya Ya, thats what you said when you opened the thread in figt club section to bash windows, but chinked out when you saw plethora of flaws 



> it has the cut option,


Where, where, where? This proves nepcker is a lier cos he said Finder has no cut option. hey Arya, didn't you the screenshot I posted in the other thread? Where is cut here?

*img81.imageshack.us/img81/2459/nocutoptionql4.jpg




> It has the functionality of the address bar


Nope, like zeeshan said, it doesn't show where I am right now so that I can copy paste the address to use somewhere.



> and much better bread crumb navigation than Explorer.


 While Nokia makes bread & Coca Cola Maken engine oil. I am not bashing finder here, If I wanted to do that I would have wrote the article myself.



> 01. Spring loaded folders. (Don't give me excuses about why it is absent.)
> 02. Column view.
> 03. Dragging stuff (such as text and images) from webpages directly onto the Finder without going through the 'Save As...' routine.
> 04. Show in Finder. (You can click on any shortcut in Mac OS X and have it shown in the Finder, unlike Explorer.)
> ...


1) Then even Finder has no cut option, reason be damned.
2) Details view, tree view, List view.
3) Nope
4) Right click on the shortcut->Shurtcut tab opens-> "Open File location"
5) Nope, only icons.
6) Nope. Does that makes things easier?
7) :ROFL" how come? If I uninstall an application by draging them to trash, the link in dock stays there. When I click on it, it shows a "?" sign & no erroe messege, you call this smart 
8 ) Yup, judt drop a mp3 file over WMP icon & it will play in it.
9) Hmm...tell me one single use
10) Didn't get this.
11) Yup, Explorer does that already. Drag the sidebar to whatever size u want. The icons are indeed always 16X16
12) Sidebar, breadcrumb bar.....does that rings a bell?
13) Lolz..."very good result view" is a feature. Then you should also say that a red colour close button is also a very good result view.
14) Adobe sued MS for bundling PDF support in Vista. Sorry Microsoft is not allowed to make Windows better.
16) Same here.

Just 3 things which explorer lacks. Arya, I m not trying to bash finder here. Just a review thats why I urged you to write an article showing shortcoming & goods of Finder


----------



## Desi-Tek.com (Jun 12, 2007)

@gx_saurav is this a official hot fix from Microsoft if yes than is it possible to download it through windows update?
*thehotfixshare.net/download/index.php?dir=Language%20Neutral/Vista/&file=Windows6.0-KB931770-x86.msu


----------



## gxsaurav (Jun 12, 2007)

Lolz.....CAT = Khisiyani Billi khamba noche.


> *17) Have a particular file always open with a particular application without affecting the other files with that extension.
> 18. Dragging files onto applications to open them with that application. (Extremely limited support in Windows.)
> 19. Though not a feature of the Finder, the Dock is better for launching applications than the 'Quick Launch' area of the taskbar.
> 20. Flip does not allow you to close any of the windows unless you switch to them first.
> ...


17) Right click -> Open With....
18 ) Limited, where? Did you even used it? No really tell me where?
19) You consider quick launch as an app launcher  , no Wonder you are a ignorant i*d**. Start menu is for launching applications.
21) Very quick? Does it uses Light saber? No really this is just a biased statement. Fellow members you read & tell me here. 
22) Not a feature of File manager
23) Right click in a folder-> Arrange icons by.....
24 25 26 27 28 ) Not a feature of file manager. Why are you bringing Aqua here, should I bring aero here?
29) Control+Tab -> ALt F4
30) Windows Shell script (zeeshan , enlighten us )
31) Shift+delete
32) Fanboy

Fellow members, other then Apple's patented Spring loaded folder method, which works in windows too but just using a different approch, is there anything better in Finder?


----------



## sam_1710 (Jun 12, 2007)

@desi-tek.com : *support.microsoft.com/kb/931770


----------



## aryayush (Jun 12, 2007)

gx_saurav said:
			
		

> Where, where, where? This proves nepcker is a lier cos he said Finder has no cut option. hey Arya, didn't you the screenshot I posted in the other thread? Where is cut here?
> 
> *img81.imageshack.us/img81/2459/nocutoptionql4.jpg


I am sorry for wording my sentence wrongly. It has the cut _functionality_, but not the option itself. Hopefully, it has been fixed in the Leopard version. You cannot cut and paste with the keyboard but you can with the mouse.



			
				gx_saurav said:
			
		

> Nope, like zeeshan said, it doesn't show where I am right now so that I can copy paste the address to use somewhere.


Please, and I am sincerely requesting you this, list all the functions/advantages of the address bar and I'll tell you the counterparts in the Finder. It will help you learn something. If, however, you are only interested in the usual flame wars, then go ahead and flame it for not having the address bar. However, I do request you to post all the uses of the address bar.



			
				gx_saurav said:
			
		

> While Nokia makes bread & Coca Cola Maken engine oil. I am not bashing finder here, If I wanted to do that I would have wrote the article myself.


Column view employs bread crumb navigation. You can go back one or several steps in the hierarchy as you please. Isn't it pretty obvious and self explanatory?



			
				gx_saurav said:
			
		

> 1) Then even Finder has no cut option, reason be damned.


LOL! I am talking eggs and you are talking cows.  Finder has it, Explorer doesn't. Point noted; move on.



			
				gx_saurav said:
			
		

> 2) Details view, tree view, List view.


... but no column view. What were you trying to say!



			
				gx_saurav said:
			
		

> 3) Nope


Thanks for accepting atleast something without offering a baseless counter argument.



			
				gx_saurav said:
			
		

> 4) Right click on the shortcut->Shurtcut tab opens-> "Open File location"


Sorry, never noticed this one. I've rectified my post.



			
				gx_saurav said:
			
		

> 6) Nope. Does that makes things easier?


Of course, I use labeling extensively. All the funny things on my machine are orange, for example.



			
				gx_saurav said:
			
		

> 7) :ROFL" how come? If I uninstall an application by draging them to trash, the link in dock stays there. When I click on it, it shows a "?" sign & no erroe messege, you call this smart


Another outright lie:
*img227.imageshack.us/img227/9029/picture1bd9.png

Aliases on Mac OS X remember the location of files even if you relocate, rename or delete them, unlike Windows.



			
				gx_saurav said:
			
		

> 8 ) Yup, judt drop a mp3 file over WMP icon & it will play in it.


Can you keep a shortcut to the program somewhere in the Explorer window where it will always remain and I can drag files onto that icon to open them with that program? If yes, I'll take back that point.



			
				gx_saurav said:
			
		

> 9) Hmm...tell me one single use


I have my downloads folder in simple view available on a corner of the screen at all times for immediately launching and arranging files I download.



			
				gx_saurav said:
			
		

> 10) Didn't get this.


When you open a folder in the Finder, you can drag its icon from the toolbar to move it someplace else.



			
				gx_saurav said:
			
		

> 11) Yup, Explorer does that already. Drag the sidebar to whatever size u want. The icons are indeed always 16X16


Yeah, that's what I meant. You cannot resize the icons.



			
				gx_saurav said:
			
		

> 12) Sidebar, breadcrumb bar.....does that rings a bell?


Suppose you saved an image to '/Users/Aayush/Pictures/Aperture Library.aplibrary/Aperture.aplib/ArchiveInfo' and have that folder open in the Finder. Now if you wish to upload it to ImageShack, you select the 'Choose' option in Safari and simply drag that image into the dialog box. The dialog box automatically jumps to that location and selects the image. Now hit 'Upload'. Works with every dialog box throughout the system. I'm wondering how I ever lived without this ever since I learned of this very useful feature.



			
				gx_saurav said:
			
		

> 13) Lolz..."very good result view" is a feature. Then you should also say that a red colour close button is also a very good result view.


Yes, it is a very good feature regardless of whatever opinion you hold.



			
				gx_saurav said:
			
		

> 14) Adobe sued MS for bundling PDF support in Vista. Sorry Microsoft is not allowed to make Windows better.


I don't care who sued whom. I just know that the Finder has it and Explorer doesn't.



			
				gx_saurav said:
			
		

> 16) Same here.


What "same here"!



			
				gx_saurav said:
			
		

> 17) Right click -> Open With....


You have to do that every single time you want to open that file with that application. Of you set it to always, then every file with that extension will open with that application. I want to open some PSDs with Preview and most of them with Photoshop, which is the default. I can do so on my Mac but not on Windows.



			
				gx_saurav said:
			
		

> 18 ) Limited, where? Did you even used it? No really tell me where?


I was mistaken about this one too. I take it back and have corrected the original post. (It is worth noting though that Word files do not open with Word when dropped on its icon.)



			
				gx_saurav said:
			
		

> 19) You consider quick launch as an app launcher  , no Wonder you are a ignorant i*d**. Start menu is for launching applications.


What is 'Quick Launch' for then? Staring at the tiny icons? It is there for launching your most commonly used applications and the Dock is there for the same purpose. But, of course, the Dock is much more advanced. Even the Start bar, quick launch and taskbar combined have nothing on the OS X dock.



			
				gx_saurav said:
			
		

> 21) Very quick? Does it uses Light saber? No really this is just a biased statement. Fellow members you read & tell me here.


Mac: Right click >> Duplicate, or Alt + Drag and leave. (Even for applications.)
Windows: Select and copy. Rename. Paste. (Not possible with programs at all.)



			
				gx_saurav said:
			
		

> 22) Not a feature of File manager


Flip in Windows Vista isn't either. The desktop is a part of the Finder.



			
				gx_saurav said:
			
		

> 23) Right click in a folder-> Arrange icons by.....


Again, that does it for all files. There is no way to arrange particular files by grid.



			
				gx_saurav said:
			
		

> 24 25 26 27 28 ) Not a feature of file manager. Why are you bringing Aqua here, should I bring aero here?


You already have with Flip.



			
				gx_saurav said:
			
		

> 29) Control+Tab -> ALt F4


You have to switch to the window first and then close it. It is slow. If there are twenty applications I want to quit, I can very quickly close them all with the help of 'Command Tab'. With Flip, I'll have to keep switching to them and closing them individually.



			
				gx_saurav said:
			
		

> 30) Windows Shell script (zeeshan , enlighten us )


There is nothing like Automator in Windows. As for Shell Script - in my five years of using Windows, I never once came across a shell script or whatever that can be used in conjugation with the Finder to make things easier. In my nine months with Mac OS X, I've seen and used hundreds of useful AppleScripts.



			
				gx_saurav said:
			
		

> 31) Shift+delete


That is not secure delete and you know it. It is just a shortcut that circumvents the Recycle Bin and directly delete the file. Nothing more and nothing less.



			
				gx_saurav said:
			
		

> Just 3 things which explorer lacks. Arya, I m not trying to bash finder here. Just a review thats why I urged you to write an article showing shortcoming & goods of Finder


I just showed the goods. If you acknowledge them gracefully, I'll post the cons too.


----------



## gxsaurav (Jun 13, 2007)

aryayush said:
			
		

> You cannot cut and paste with the keyboard but you can with the mouse.


i right click on a file, no cut option there.



> Please, and I am sincerely requesting you this, list all the functions/advantages of the address bar and I'll tell you the counterparts in the Finder.


Oh well, My job is done here. We Windows users know the importance of address bar, you don't. One example....

I have a movies folder & under that I have a porn folder hidden (ya ya ), if I open the movies folder it shows no trace of any hidden file. Now to open it I don't have to go to toolbar -> folder option, I can just type "Porn" in the address bar & it will open.

Suppose I have to change icons for file types & those icons are saved somewhere deepn in e:\ drive. i can simply open that folder once or nevigate to that folder using the open dialog, click on the address bar & copy the address. Now I select some icons, then go to somewhere else & change some other icon. To go back the previous icon folder I don't need to nevigate again, just paste the address in open field & enter, it will directly open that folder.



> Column view employs bread crumb navigation. You can go back one or several steps in the hierarchy as you please. Isn't it pretty obvious and self explanatory?


Its a view, why change from my current view? Breadcrumb is in Explorer.



> ... but no column view. What were you trying to say!


They provide same functionality of column view, just not the way Apple's method "looks" like



> Of course, I use labeling extensively. All the funny things on my machine are orange, for example.


Good Feature 



> Another outright lie:
> *img227.imageshack.us/img227/9029/picture1bd9.png
> 
> Aliases on Mac OS X remember the location of files even if you relocate, rename or delete them, unlike Windows.


Will post the video tomorrow, going to sleep now



> Can you keep a shortcut to the program somewhere in the Explorer window where it will always remain and I can drag files onto that icon to open them with that program? If yes, I'll take back that point.


Yup, not explorer window but drag to start menu or quicklaunch icon.



> I have my downloads folder in simple view available on a corner of the screen at all times for immediately launching and arranging files I download.





> When you open a folder in the Finder, you can drag its icon from the toolbar to move it someplace else.


Hmm...nothing important or ground breaking, again...you call this a feature?



> Yeah, that's what I meant. You cannot resize the icons.


Nor can you set the distance between 2 icons.



> I don't care who sued whom. I just know that the Finder has it and Explorer doesn't.


Well, if you don't care who sued them, then it is irrelevant. Just install Adobe Reader



> I want to open some PSDs with Preview and most of them with Photoshop, which is the default. I can do so on my Mac but not on Windows.


Again, nothing to be treated as features. Windows has been doing the same using "Open With...." which also shows frequently used apps which were used to open that file type...next.



> Even the Start bar, quick launch and taskbar combined have nothing on the OS X dock.


Dock doesn't show any count of how many Windows of same App I have opened.



> Windows: Select and copy. Rename. Paste.


Nope, simple ctrl+c ctrl+v. It automatically renames.



> Again, that does it for all files. There is no way to arrange particular files by grid.


Yup, & thats why we have "File specific Sort"


> You have to switch to the window first and then close it. It is slow. If there are twenty applications I want to quit, I can very quickly close them all with the help of 'Command Tab'.


Lie I guess, I was unable to do it here. Show a video plz



> I never once came across a shell script or whatever that can be used in conjugation with the Finder to make things easier.


Lolz....I leave this to zeeshan 



> That is not secure delete and you know it.


The file is gone. now if some user can buy a app to recover a deleted file, then he can also buy a un-shredding application
I just showed the goods. If you acknowledge them gracefully, I'll post the cons too.[/quote]

i did not started this thread to bash finder. That is upto the users to decide whether they like a Windows XP era file manger or 2007 Era file manager. I guess Apple will not port iFinder to Windows


----------



## blackleopard92 (Jun 13, 2007)

aryayush said:
			
		

> I have my downloads folder in simple view available on a corner of the screen at all times for immediately launching and arranging files I download.


why? can't u minimise it??? 



			
				aryayush said:
			
		

> Yeah, that's what I meant. You cannot resize the icons.


u can always use resize icons through view menu.infact, why would i want icons to resize when decreasing/increasing size of sidebar is beyond me!



			
				aryayush said:
			
		

> There is nothing like Automator in Windows. As for Shell Script - in my five years of using Windows, I never once came across a shell script or whatever that can be used in conjugation with the Finder to make things easier. In my nine months with Mac OS X, I've seen and used hundreds of useful AppleScripts.


pwershell is a very advanced scripter for windows. it's just that mostly servers/admins and advanced home users use it. it's not for general public.


----------



## aryayush (Jun 13, 2007)

blackleopard02 said:
			
		

> why? can't u minimise it???


I (and most other Mac users) don't like minimising anything. Everything should be front and centre. And then Exposé does the job of managing windows brilliantly. 

Two more features of the Finder:
*33. When you are downloading something in Safari, the icon in the Finder shows a live progress indicator.
34. You can even relocate and rename busy files in the Finder. For example, you can rename a Word file even when it is open in TextEdit and you are editing it and you can move a file anywhere even when it has not been completely downloaded. Nothing will be interrupted.*

Since Leopard is not out yet, I am not mentioning features of the Finder in Leopard. Whatever I've seen till now simply blows away anything Explorer has to offer.


----------



## goobimama (Jun 13, 2007)

Look boys. The point of the whole thing as I see it, is not a feature by feature comparison of the situation. There may be some features that OS X lacks (like cut option) but as "I" see it, it makes up for in more than one ways.

ACCORDING TO ME:
Its easier to use. Now this is not really subjective. At first one is used to the windows way and it could get a bit crazy sometimes. But once you leave all that baggage behind, its beautiful. And even working between OSes is not interfering. I can't control+C in windows and Command+C in mac without thinking. its like shifting gears on the Bullet with the right foot and on the fiero with the left foot.

Its also more stable. It gives NO PROBLEMS. Works as they say it does. And if there is a problem, they fix it immediately. It is a zero maintenance affair (unlike a Bullet). 

And I'm going to say this out loud, from what' I've seen about leopard, it simply blows Vista out of the way. Its way more than I expected...

I'm timing out from this kind of discussion. GX, take it over.


----------



## sakumar79 (Jun 13, 2007)

Regarding spring loaded folders in Finder, I havent used it but the gist I am getting from this discussion is that it is basically to allow easy transfer of files from one folder to another right? Is this both copy files as well as move files or just one of the two? Cause, with explorer it is much easier...

Heres what I do in explorer. Open it. If you open explorer, you will get folder tree in left menu. If you open "My computer", you can get the folder tree through View->Explorer Bar->Folders. There are two ways to transfer the file. 
1. Navigate the main screen to the folder from which you want to take your files. On the folder tree, use the + symbol to get the tree to show the destination folder (if you click on the folder instead of the + near it, the folder contents will open in the main window, but you can set that right with backspace). Now, drag and drop files. In addition, if you use right-click-drag and drop, you will get option to copy, move and create shortcuts for the file in the destination folder.

2. Just like spring-loaded folder, you can use the tree. Holding the dragged file over a folder will expand the tree allowing you to navigate. If you mistakenly navigate into the wrong folder, you can easily backtrack because other folders are also available... This way, you can navigate to the destination folder in the folder tree while drag-and-dropping, but it is slower than the first method due to the time delay (may be customisable, but I dont know) waiting for the folder to expand when you hover over it in the tree...

Please explain if the spring loaded folder does something else also, because that info doesnt seem to be available here...

Arun


----------



## gxsaurav (Jun 13, 2007)

aryayush said:
			
		

> I (and most other Mac users) don't like minimising anything. Everything should be front and centre. And then Exposé does the job of managing windows brilliantly.



Subjective & ir relavent.




> *3. When you are downloading something in Safari, the icon in the Finder shows a live progress indicator.*



This is feature of Application not finder. iGetter does it too.



> * 34. You can even relocate and rename busy files in the Finder. For example, you can rename a Word file even when it is open in TextEdit and you are editing it and you can move a file anywhere even when it has not been completely downloaded. Nothing will be interrupted.*


Already available in Vista. Should I post a video?



> Since Leopard is not out yet, I am not mentioning features of the Finder in Leopard. Whatever I've seen till now simply blows away anything Explorer has to offer.



You means filmstrip...i mean coverflow 

@ Arun

With springloaded folder, it is mainly what tree view does. You drag some files over a folder & hover your mouse over it for 1 second, that folder automatically opens. You can do this in windows too using enter key on that folder. Nothing novelty


----------



## aryayush (Jun 13, 2007)

gx_saurav said:
			
		

> This is feature of Application not finder. iGetter does it too.


Yes, but it is possible because the Finder supports it.



			
				sakumar79 said:
			
		

> Just like spring-loaded folder, you can use the tree. Holding the dragged file over a folder will expand the tree allowing you to navigate. If you mistakenly navigate into the wrong folder, you can easily backtrack because other folders are also available... This way, you can navigate to the destination folder in the folder tree while drag-and-dropping, but it is slower than the first method due to the time delay (may be customisable, but I dont know) waiting for the folder to expand when you hover over it in the tree...


Try pressing space bar when you drag something over that tree. On a Mac, pressing space bar immediately open the folder, bypassing the delay.
The only difference now between Explorer in Vista and Finder is that the Finder follows the Fitt's law. The targets are a lot bigger so it is easier to hit them. The tree view in Leopard is very tiny. But still, the feature does exist so I am removing this from the list too.


----------



## sakumar79 (Jun 13, 2007)

^^^ But, if you go by my first method (navigate to destination folder in tree first and then drag-drop), it is faster than using spring-loaded folder, right? Why do something the slow way when you can do it the faster way? Even if you consider pressing the spacebar to speed up, my method will be faster, right?

Arun


----------



## aryayush (Jun 13, 2007)

How exactly? The Windows method is definitely slower because you will constantly be overshooting the small targets and will have to be very precise. How is the Mac way slower?


----------



## gxsaurav (Jun 13, 2007)

Arya, take a look at the video I made & you will understand whether it is slow or not. unless you use it, you can't say. 

In spring loaded folders, once you go inside a folder you cannot go backward to the previous folder


----------



## sandeepk (Jun 13, 2007)

Thanks for this great review..


----------



## blackleopard92 (Jun 13, 2007)

aryayush said:
			
		

> How exactly? The Windows method is definitely slower because you will constantly be overshooting the small targets and will have to be very precise. How is the Mac way slower?


he means, first explore to the folder where u want the file to go, and then simply ctrl+x ,ctrl+v. of course it's faster.


----------



## aryayush (Jun 13, 2007)

How though? That only increases the time spent to press the shortcuts on the keyboard. You still have to navigate to both the folders like you have to when you use drag-and-drop.



			
				gx_saurav said:
			
		

> In spring loaded folders, once you go inside a folder you cannot go backward to the previous folder


You can. Either drag the file out of the window or press 'Command + Up' (which is the better option).


----------



## sakumar79 (Jun 13, 2007)

Windows (from what I do): 1. Open Explorer. 2. Navigate to destination folder in tree on the left side (Click the + sign to browse subfolders instantly). 3. Navigate to source in main window. 4. Drag files from source and drop on subfolder.

Mac (from what you seem to say): 1. Open Finder. 2. Navigate to source. 3. Drag file, use spring-loaded folder concept to navigate to destination, using spacebar to instantly springload desired folder.

Both should take about same time, but pressing spacebar to instantly springload for each folder is a bit more cumbersome than navigating to destination folder using + sign (the former requires mouse+keyboard action, wheras the latter can be done with either mouse only, keyboard only, or mouse+keyboard)

One more thing that I would like a mac user to confirm... In windows, we have option called ClickLock. Using this, I dont have to hold mouse button down while dragging. If I hold it for n seconds (configurable), it locks it for dragging... Is similar feature available in mac? I hope so, otherwise, drag and drop will be a pain...

One more thing regarding duplication of files. In Mac, you said Alt+Drag creates copy. In Windows, Ctrl+Drag creates copy of file. Of course, if you do this with apps there often will be problem.

Arun


----------



## gxsaurav (Jun 13, 2007)

Apps are not supposed to be copied this way in Windows. That just doesn't work. I wonder what purpose this serves in Mac. Does this means I can open 2 yahoo messengers.


----------



## aryayush (Jun 13, 2007)

Yes, you can. And it serves a lot of purposes. Playing two chess games simultaneously, downloading two YouTube video from an application that only does one at a time.

You, of course, will always say that something that is there on Mac OS X and not on Windows is useless.


----------



## gxsaurav (Jun 13, 2007)

aryayush said:
			
		

> Yes, you can. And it serves a lot of purposes. Playing two chess games simultaneously, downloading two YouTube video from an application that only does one at a time.


Hmm, never needed this. Youtube downloaders available for Windows support simultanious download here . By the way, do mean running multiple instances of Yahoo Messnger like this....

*img378.imageshack.us/img378/4227/multipleyahoomessengersf7.jpg

OMG...how did this happened on Windows then? 

Arya, *Windows can do this easily, it is just limited to application which support it & not Windows/Windows Explorer.*



> You, of course, will always say that something that is there on Mac OS X and not on Windows is useless.


Hey, who wrote this



			
				arya said:
			
		

> More features != better


Lolz

Since you bought Taskbar to the discussion, here is dock annoynence.

1) Dock doesn't groups windows of similar applications. Just take a look at the screenshot below. I have multiple windows of Safari & Finder open but they do not group the usual method. This makes the dock stretch resulting in smaller icons. With multiple windows, this results in a very small dock with icon size as low as 16X16 pixel which makes it very hard to identify things.

*img71.imageshack.us/img71/2159/nogroupingtm9.jpg

2) Dock does not notifies me about how many Windows of a single application I have opened by showing a count. Suppose in this example I have two windows of firefox open. However doesn't has no inidcation method to show me how many windows I have open for firefox. I have myself accidently quit firefox few times thinking that the window I have on my screen is the last firefox window. (Example)

*img487.imageshack.us/img487/1923/picture1qk1.th.jpg


----------



## gxsaurav (Jun 13, 2007)

Kenshin said:
			
		

> tats why arya doesn't minimise them i guess...hehe



Lolz...By the way, I was just looking through what else Leopard copied from Vista's Windows Explorer. Well, guess what, even *the new feature of leopard desktop is already there in Vista & with the same name, "Stacks".

Cupertino has started there photocopiers
*


----------



## sakumar79 (Jun 13, 2007)

@aryayush, Some more points on Explorer - 
1. Regarding closing multiple apps simultaneously without opening them - Press Ctrl+Alt+Del to bring up Task manager, under applications tab, you can select multiple apps, and simultaneously minimize, maximize, close, etc.
2. Did you ever search for scripts to enhance your experience while using Windows? I am guessing no... Most people who use Windows are like that. Check out *www.activexperts.com/activmonitor/windowsmanagement/adminscripts/ for some sample scripts that let you automate many tasks... You can google for more resources...
3. Regarding having 2 copies of same application running at once, do you have any specific app in windows that doesnt allow you to run two copies? Because, most of the apps I use allow multiple instances...

I am yet to get your response to my earlier post and am hoping it will be soon (I showed how windows way of drag-and-drop with tree folder is faster than using spring loaded folder, showed how easy it is to create a copy of a file in windows also, and asked about facility to clicklock in mac). In the drag-drop issue, one more issue I would like to raise... How easy is it to drag-drop files from one source folder to different destination folders? Suppose I download some songs, pics, videos... Then, I have folders separately for each and I want to select and transfer files based on type, etc... Now, from explorer, I feel that it will be much easier to do compared to Finder (from what I read) thru spring loaded folders... If it is otherwise, please post steps involved with Finder to elaborate.

Also, you mentioned that you can make just one file in a folder align to grid and keep the rest in disarray. Can you explain why this is useful? Doesnt seem to make sense to me... I typically want to keep all my files in order always... 

Arun


----------



## aryayush (Jun 13, 2007)

@gx_saurav,
The name is the same but there is absolutely no similarity between the features. Both serve completely different purposes and are used in different contexts. Stacks in Vista is a feature of Windows Explorer and Stacks in Leopard is a feature of the Dock.


----------



## gxsaurav (Jun 13, 2007)

> 2. Did you ever search for scripts to enhance your experience while using Windows? I am guessing no... Most people who use Windows are like that. Check out *www.activexperts.com/activmon.../adminscripts/ for some sample scripts that let you automate many tasks... You can google for more resources...


Even I did not know about these until few days ago Zeeshan told me how easy it is to do automatc thing using shell scripts. Too bad *there is no application in Windows to assist in making such scripts.* This is why I said about zeeshan to enlighten us about this.

3) This is actually not a fault of Explorer/ Facility of Finder. In windows this is application dependent. Such as me running two instance of Yahoo messenger as shows above in Windows



> Also, you mentioned that you can make just one file in a folder align to grid and keep the rest in disarray. Can you explain why this is useful? Doesnt seem to make sense to me... I typically want to keep all my files in order always...


Arya forgot to mention one thing. *you cannot set custom horizontal & vertical spacing or distance between 2 icons in Finder* & yet maintain then in a grid. Windows Explorer had this feature since Windows 98

*img486.imageshack.us/img486/617/untitledqb7.jpg


----------



## aryayush (Jun 13, 2007)

sakumar79 said:
			
		

> @aryayush, Some more points on Explorer -
> 1. Regarding closing multiple apps simultaneously without opening them - Press Ctrl+Alt+Del to bring up Task manager, under applications tab, you can select multiple apps, and simultaneously minimize, maximize, close, etc.
> 2. Did you ever search for scripts to enhance your experience while using Windows? I am guessing no... Most people who use Windows are like that. Check out *www.activexperts.com/activmonitor/windowsmanagement/adminscripts/ for some sample scripts that let you automate many tasks... You can google for more resources...
> 3. Regarding having 2 copies of same application running at once, do you have any specific app in windows that doesnt allow you to run two copies? Because, most of the apps I use allow multiple instances...


All of these points can be answered with one word 'convenience'. It is convenient on Mac to quit while using 'Command + Tab', it is convenient to use obtain and use AppleScripts and it is convenient to have multiple copies of applications. Windows users generally do not appreciate the value of convenience, Mac users do. 



			
				sakumar79 said:
			
		

> I showed how windows way of drag-and-drop with tree folder is faster than using spring loaded folder


And I showed you how it isn't.



			
				sakumar79 said:
			
		

> showed how easy it is to create a copy of a file in windows also


I accepted that and corrected it in my original post.



			
				sakumar79 said:
			
		

> and asked about facility to clicklock in mac


It is there for notebook trackpads but I am not sure about desktops. I am guessing it isn't.



			
				sakumar79 said:
			
		

> In the drag-drop issue, one more issue I would like to raise... How easy is it to drag-drop files from one source folder to different destination folders? Suppose I download some songs, pics, videos... Then, I have folders separately for each and I want to select and transfer files based on type, etc... Now, from explorer, I feel that it will be much easier to do compared to Finder (from what I read) thru spring loaded folders... If it is otherwise, please post steps involved with Finder to elaborate.


I do not understand why you would find it difficult with drag and drop. I don't. I frequently keep moving stuff from my downloads folder to various folders on my (late) external hard disk and I always use drag and drop. You'll have to use spring loaded folders (with a sense of curiosity and a desire to actually learn a new way of doing things) to appreciate it fully. 



			
				sakumar79 said:
			
		

> Also, you mentioned that you can make just one file in a folder align to grid and keep the rest in disarray. Can you explain why this is useful? Doesnt seem to make sense to me... I typically want to keep all my files in order always...


Then you can do that on a Mac. But I, for one, like to just drag stuff to my desktop every now and then for temporary use and I don't want them to align with the permanent items on the right. However, sometimes I decide that I'll be needing one of those files for a long time, so I just align it on the right. It is useful for me and it is not a bad feature to have.
I can show you a direct comparison. Vista has 256x256 icons and IMHO, they are practically useless. At least I would never use it. But still, it is not a bad feature to have so I listed it among the Finder's drawbacks, even though I do not actually consider it to be one.


----------



## gxsaurav (Jun 13, 2007)

aryayush said:
			
		

> All of these points can be answered with one word 'convenience'. It is convenient on Mac to quit while using 'Command + Tab', it is convenient to use obtain and use AppleScripts and it is convenient to have multiple copies of applications. Windows users generally do not appreciate the value of convenience, Mac users do.


Not quite.

We can close an application by alt+F4 while switching to it. Wonder how is that hard.

I guess you forgot to read what shell script is, right?

Multiple copy of application like arun said depends on the application. I can run here multiple copies of both 3Ds Max & Maya, same with Winamp.



> And I showed you how it isn't.


So far, you haven't shown anything. They both  do the same work, just that you do not want to learn something.



> I can show you a direct comparison. Vista has 256x256 icons and IMHO, they are practically useless.


* The maximum icon size in Tiger running on a 20" display with resolution of 1600X1200 is 128X128.

The maximum size of Vista Icons on a 20" or 24" display with resolution of 1600X1200 or beyond that is 256X256 with font size up to 72 pixel.* 

I don't think you even know how easy it is to look in explorer of Vista when running on a 20" LCD monitor with a resolution of 1600X1200. The big icons with big text does comes in handy.


----------



## aryayush (Jun 14, 2007)

gx_saurav said:
			
		

> * The maximum icon size in Tiger running on a 20" display with resolution of 1600X1200 is 128X128.
> 
> The maximum size of Vista Icons on a 20" or 24" display with resolution of 1600X1200 or beyond that is 256X256 with font size up to 72 pixel.*
> 
> I don't think you even know how easy it is to look in explorer of Vista when running on a 20" LCD monitor with a resolution of 1600X1200. The big icons with big text does comes in handy.


I have a monitor with a 1680x1050  resolution. You don't. So I think I am in a better position to comment on this one.

I accept that most icons in Windows Vista look simply fabulous and they look beautiful when viewed at 256x256. When I had freshly installed Vista, I pimped the size to the largest in Explorer for a few days. But after that, I brought it to saner levels again. It is just not possible to work with icons the size of your palms. It is very distracting and it gets in your way. You do not want your icons to be that huge.


----------



## gxsaurav (Jun 14, 2007)

aryayush said:
			
		

> I have a monitor with a 1680x1050  resolution. You don't. So I think I am in a better position to comment on this one.



Are you trying ot say "I am the only one among us who has used a higher resolution screen"  lolz...talk about ignorance.




> I accept that most icons in Windows Vista look simply fabulous and they look beautiful when viewed at 256x256. When I had freshly installed Vista, I pimped the size to the largest in Explorer for a few days. But after that, I brought it to saner levels again.* It is just not possible to work with icons the size of your palms.* It is very distracting and it gets in your way. You do not want your icons to be that huge.



Palm size? Then *I wonder why is apple Implementing 512X512 pixel icons in Leopard after Vista already implemented them.

*I hope you have used the latest developer build of Leopard


----------



## aryayush (Jun 14, 2007)

No, I haven't. It is only available to developers (at least legally).

Like I said, it is a completely useless feature for me, but it is not a problem if the feature is there. Apple needs to offer it for the sake of competition. Tiger had larger icons than XP, so Microsoft made them larger in Vista. Now Vista has larger icons, so Apple has to increase the resolution of their icons too otherwise consumers will hold that against the operating system.


----------



## gxsaurav (Jun 14, 2007)

aryayush said:
			
		

> Like I said, it is a completely useless feature for me, but it is not a problem if the feature is there. Apple needs to offer it for the sake of competition. *Tiger had larger icons than XP,* so Microsoft made them larger in Vista. Now Vista has larger icons, so Apple has to increase the resolution of their icons too otherwise consumers will hold that against the operating system.


Lolz...so just cos icons are big in competition, leopard is supporting it.

Umm...not compleately true. *Windows XP has icons size possible upto 128X128, however the inbuilt Icons in Windows XP were 48X48 max.* Third party softwares such as Icon packager bought this functionality to front.

From your Old thread I came to see this line written everywhere


> Though it is not as advanced as in Mac OS X



How come? Does Mac OS X makes bread Toast in HD . They both do the same thing.


----------



## goobimama (Jun 14, 2007)

But those icons hardly had any colour depth.... OS X's icons were whatever-bit from when it first shipped...

You can lick the icons off the screen
- something along that line was said by Mr. Jobs.


----------



## aryayush (Jun 14, 2007)

He said that about the buttons, not the icons.


----------



## goobimama (Jun 14, 2007)

Hmm... thought it was the icons.

ah. Just checked it. It is buttons. My mistake


----------



## sakumar79 (Jun 14, 2007)

@aryayush, you did not tell me why spring loaded folders is faster. Read this thread carefully, and you will notice that in one of the later posts, I have explained in detail steps involved in windows and mac and why I believe the windows way is faster. Anyway, for your convenience, I will put it here again

----
Windows (from what I do): 1. Open Explorer. 2. Navigate to destination folder in tree on the left side (Click the + sign to browse subfolders instantly). 3. Navigate to source in main window. 4. Drag files from source and drop on subfolder.

Mac (from what you seem to say): 1. Open Finder. 2. Navigate to source. 3. Drag file, use spring-loaded folder concept to navigate to destination, using spacebar to instantly springload desired folder.

Both should take about same time, but pressing spacebar to instantly springload for each folder is a bit more cumbersome than navigating to destination folder using + sign (the former requires mouse+keyboard action, wheras the latter can be done with either mouse only, keyboard only, or mouse+keyboard)
----

Now tell me where I am going wrong...

Secondly, you said convenience is the reason and I dont get it. I said you can do the same in windows (use scripts, run 2 copies of any app, close multiple apps very quickly) and you say mac is convenient. Please elaborate...

Thirdly, in windows, you can turn off auto arrange and use align to grid. I hope you are aware of that... I use it regularly. For example, you can keep your system shortcuts in one group on the top left corner of the desktop, your browsing apps in another group at the top right corner, office apps at bottom left corner and games in bottom right corner. All these will be aligned to grid. Is this what you are trying to say is missing, or did I misunderstand you?

Please explain to me the steps involved in moving many files from one source folder (say, your basic download folder) into various folders (music, wallpapers, videos, etc). I did not say that it will be difficult, but I felt that it will be easier with windows than with mac... I know how I do it in windows... So, I am requesting you to elaborate how it is done with mac so that I can judge which will be better with me... 

Unfortunately, I am from a small town called Madurai and I have to travel to Chennai (about 10 hours) if I have to get access to a Mac, unless I purchase one myself... My brother has an old Mac laptop, but he is in the US and I speak to him once a week only...

Arun


----------



## aryayush (Jun 14, 2007)

Look, I have been severely mistaken before but I think you really are inquisitive about how a Mac works. If you are seriously interested, I'm going to solve all your doubts. My only request is, please do not pull another gx_saurav on me!

I'll reply to your last post later today. I've got to go somewhere right now.


----------



## iMav (Jun 14, 2007)

dont pull another gx ....  ur afraid tht this guy will also pwn u tooth and nail


----------



## aryayush (Jun 14, 2007)

Oh yes, I am shivering in my pants.


----------



## gxsaurav (Jun 14, 2007)

Lolz....public defeat. Surrender to the borg....I had no idea you will feel so embarrassed after pwnage. You are not even replying ot the questions I ask about How to change icon spacing in finder or how to group multiple things together in dock



> You can. Either drag the file out of the window or press 'Command + Up' (which is the better option).



I just checked this, Dragged the drag pile out of the finder window & i got the original folder, this isn't what i wanted to ask. I asked "How do i go one folder up or one folder back"



			
				arya said:
			
		

> Dragging stuff (such as text, links and images) from webpages directly onto the Finder without going through the 'Save As...' routine.


See this is why I told you to see the eye opener videos for which u act ignorant . *We can drag Images, URL & text from webpages directly to the explorer.

*Dragging an Image from IE 7 to Photoshop

Dragging a piece of text from IE 7 to Word 2007

Dragging an image from IE 7 to Explorer Desktop

Dragging a URL link from IE 7 to explorer Desktop



> 07. Smart aliases. (The shortcuts in Windows are dumb.)


Dumb in what sense? When you make a shortcut of something & then change the location of the original file, on starting the shortcut it automatically searches for the new location of file or you can simply browse to the new location. This feature has been there in Windows since Windows 2000.



> 08. Adding applications to the toolbar. (You can add an application you frequently use and drop files onto the icon to open them with that application.)


Drag the file to quicklaunch icons.  



> 09. Simple view. (A basic view without the fancy options. Very useful.)


It was there in Windows XP. You can still remove the details pane in Vista.



> 10. Dragging folders from the toolbar.


I wonder how is this a feature.



> 11. Resizing the sidebar. (It proportionately increases and decreases the size of the icons.)


You can resize the sidebar in Explorer too, but it won't change the icon size.



> 12. Dragging files/folders from the Finder into navigation dialog boxes (such as the Open and Save dialogs) to directly navigate to that position.


Simply click on the breadcrubm bar to navigate to wherever you like from any Dialog box like open or save



> 14. Previewing Adobe's document formats (without installing anything else).


Just PDF & PSD in Finder. Sorry, MS cannot provide support for these without installing Adobe Products.



> 16. Long names of items are better truncated.


 You mean this? How does finder makes it better? Does it truncates names in Butter & cheese.

*img521.imageshack.us/img521/238/longnamewp6.jpg

The file which is selected shows full name.


> 17. Have a particular file always open with a particular application without affecting the other files with that extension.


Right click -> Open With....



> 19. Though not a feature of the Finder, the Dock is better for launching applications than the 'Quick Launch' area of the taskbar.


Quick launch is not for launching applications.



> 23. Pressing 'Command' and leaving a file aligns it to grid (without having to turn the option on for every file in the folder).


Right click in explorer Windows -> Arrange icons or Sort by or Stack by.....



> 30. AppleScript and Automator support.


Windows Shell Script



> 34. You can even relocate and rename busy files in the Finder.


On Windows it depends on what application r u using. Just an eye opener for you. Try playing a file in Windows Media player & then delete that file. WMP will still play it.

You better remove the following misleading things from your post & add the cons of finder too, like no icon spacing, no dock grouping of similar windows, no resize of Windows from any side, no address bar etc etc etc.


> 24. Hot corners. The corners of the screen can be set to trigger events such as Exposé, the Dashboard and screensaver.


Yup, TopDesk & Switcher & many other applications do this cos Windows Explorer supports it

anyway, goobi I think you forgot to read something. *Both the Windows XP .ICO format & Mac OS X .ICNS format support 24bit colour with 8 bit alpha channel*. It is just up to the designer to make it. Take a look at those thousands of beautiful icon packs available on wincustomise or deviantart.


----------



## iMav (Jun 14, 2007)

arre arya bhai kahe muu lag rahe ho .... os x does nothing spectacular its an os which is still an infant as far as windows is concerned


----------



## gxsaurav (Jun 14, 2007)

Aare agar muh nahi lagega to Apple ka advertisement kaise karega


----------



## Zeeshan Quireshi (Jun 14, 2007)

*Windows Shell Scripts*

Well here's a simply shell script i've written in JScript . Here's what it does:
*1.It opens notepad 
2. Then types the text in the variable "toType" 
3. Then it sends they key combination {CTRL}+S to save the file
4. Then it types out the File Name specified in the fileName Variable
5. Then it sends the {ENTER} key to finally save the file*

_To run this file , save it with a ".js" extension n then double click it_

```
var WshShell = WScript.CreateObject("WScript.Shell");
// Launch Notepad
WshShell.Run("notepad");
//Wait  One Second for Notepad to Start
WScript.Sleep(1000);
//Variable to store what to type
var toType = "Hey , this is what WSH can do";
for(var i = 0 ; i < toType.length ; i++)
{
//Timme gap in ms between keystrokes
WScript.Sleep(100);
WshShell.SendKeys(toType.charAt(i));
}
WshShell.SendKeys("^s");
var fileName = "WSH.txt";
WScript.Sleep(1000);
for(i = 0 ; i < fileName.length ; i++)
{
WScript.Sleep(100);
WshShell.SendKeys(fileName.charAt(i));
}
WScript.Sleep(1000);
WshShell.SendKeys("{ENTER}");
```


----------



## Zeeshan Quireshi (Jun 14, 2007)

Kenshin said:
			
		

> ^^^ coooooooollll u rrrrrrr
> 
> wat more thing we can do with this...can we close a app at sum specific time..and then shutdown....i really wanted my utorrent to close at 3AM and then pc to shut down....


yups u can do anything that a normal user can do with WSH , it is in fact a way to script the shell with which the user interacts . yes u can easily write a WSH script to shutdown ur pc at 3AM .


----------



## Zeeshan Quireshi (Jun 14, 2007)

Kenshin said:
			
		

> can u link me sum tutorial....i really wanna do this...it seems fun..


*msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/library/9bbdkx3k.aspx

i Recommend u use JScript instead of VBScript for all your scripting tasks


----------



## blackleopard92 (Jun 14, 2007)

sakumar79 said:
			
		

> Please explain to me the steps involved in moving many files from one source folder (say, your basic download folder) into various folders (music, wallpapers, videos, etc). I did not say that it will be difficult, but I felt that it will be easier with windows than with mac... I know how I do it in windows... So, I am requesting you to elaborate how it is done with mac so that I can judge which will be better with me...


and using magic folders widget makes organising files way too easy.


----------



## sakumar79 (Jun 14, 2007)

@gx, Right Click->Open with... will give two options: open the file with a non-default app once, or change the setting so that all files of the same extension open with a new default app... What aryayush wants to say is that he wants only that particular file to be associated with a different default apps, but other files of the same extension to continue to be associated with the old default... This may be slightly useful. For example, by default, your .doc file will be a Word Document... Occasionally, you may get a .doc file that is actually a older wordstar file (not sure if wordstar is correct, but one of the older word processors used the .doc extension and opening it in Word by default would give garbled character). He would want to associate that .doc file alone to be opened with a different software and other doc files with Word... In this sense, it is a useful feature, but to what extent will vary from one individual to another...

@aryayush, I cant pull a gx on you because I dont have access to a Mac here... To be frank, I am a heavy Windows user, and even if I decide to go for a Mac, it wont be in the near future... My main problem is this... I work for my Dad's office, and we have about 15 computers (from old 386 to new machines). All the new machines are based on the cheaper Sempron proccy and we use a lot of windows based (structural engineering) software, so switching to mac at the office is probably out of the question... At home, I use the computer for three main things - gaming, internet browsing and office work... For two of the three, windows is better. For browsing, I am using Opera and very satisfied with it... Planning to try out Safari a bit later after Beta is over and stable release comes out. But from what you say in the other Safari thread, it is not as good as its Mac version... However, dont think that because I am not going to change to Mac any time soon, you dont need to explain anything to me... Among my relatives and friends, I am often consulted for computer-related purchases... So, if I feel that Mac will serve them better, I will definitely recommend it to them...

Arun


----------



## blackleopard92 (Jun 14, 2007)

it seems that the size of details pane can also be changed. simply rt click (near the left hand icon) and select between three sizes, small, medium and large. quite useful


----------



## gxsaurav (Jun 14, 2007)

blackleopard92 said:
			
		

> it seems that the size of details pane can also be changed. simply rt click (near the left hand icon) and select between three sizes, small, medium and large. quite useful


Not only that, simply drag it to increse the vertical size too....such as *Uber Size* 

*img369.imageshack.us/img369/1927/untitledwj3.jpg


----------



## gxsaurav (Jun 16, 2007)

Another small or big flaw in Mac OS X & Finder.

In Windwos Explorer, I can simply right click on an image & select "Set as desktop background". Done.

In Finder there is no such way. You have to either go to control panel & from there change or right click on the desktop & select "Change desktop background". Then give the folder path & select the image to set as wallpaper.

*Windows Explorer is far convinient. *

For some ignorant users who say that Windows Explorer cannot show preview of video, audio etc with words like "No chance in hell". Well, guess what...I already proved that it does, & how easy it is to implement this feature for more file formats.

Right now, Windows Vista support many file formats in preview out of the box. I am myself using PDF preview & PSD preview too. But these plugins are not yet official from Adobe & are made by other developers.

Here is a screenshot of my Explorer with a PDF file in preview.

*img507.imageshack.us/img507/8374/pdfhn5.th.jpg

Download if you use Adobe Reader 8.1

Download if you use Foxit PDF Reader

Similarly you can preview PSD Files too in Vista

*www.codeproject.com/vista/PhotoshopPreviewHandler/VistaPreview.jpg

Hmm..have the Macboys quit.? Wonder where is arya with his reply according to this statement.



			
				arya said:
			
		

> Look, I have been severely mistaken before but I think you really are inquisitive about how a Mac works. If you are seriously interested, I'm going to solve all your doubts. My only request is, please do not pull another gx_saurav on me!



I forgot to mention.

*Windows Explorer even supports videos as wallpapers. You can set any video as a wallpaper with Windows Vista Ultimate & Windows Dreamscene*


----------



## goobimama (Jun 16, 2007)

^^ For a good amount of CPU cycles I might add

As for using Quartz compositions on the Mac desktop (which are rendered 1:1 pixel mapping) use hardly 5% of CPU which is even dual core optimized.


----------



## gxsaurav (Jun 16, 2007)

^^^^ umm...not quite

If you are using mpg or wmv file as the video, then CPU just decodes the video while GPU renders it on screen.

If you are using Stardock's free Dreamscene then there is hardly any CPU involved, & it stops if you have some other window on top


----------



## blackleopard92 (Jun 16, 2007)

gx_saurav said:
			
		

> ^^^^ umm...not quite
> 
> If you are using mpg or wmv file as the video, then CPU just decodes the video while GPU renders it on screen.
> 
> If you are using Stardock's free Dreamscene then there is hardly any CPU involved, & it stops if you have some other window on top


also, if the video resolution is the same size as your desktop, then minimal cycles are used, otherwise, by default, the video is resized to match the desktop resolution on fly. consuming cycles.
this behaviour can be edited in the Desktop background options.


----------



## gxsaurav (Jun 16, 2007)

^^^ Add to it that *Mac OS X has no such feature*. Using a pre-compiled screen saver is not equivalent to using any video of your choice, including but not limited to WMV HD porn


----------



## iMav (Jun 16, 2007)

u have p0rn as ur screensaver


----------



## gxsaurav (Jun 16, 2007)

what...no  (adult baate mat karo, yahan 18 years old ***boys hain )

I just gave an example.


----------



## goobimama (Jun 16, 2007)

gx_saurav said:
			
		

> ^^^ Add to it that *Mac OS X has no such feature*. Using a pre-compiled screen saver is not equivalent to using any video of your choice, including but not limited to WMV HD porn



I could just as well say that Windows has no such feature as using a quartz composition (which is very easy to create btw) as a desktop wallpaper. One can also use a screensaver as a wallpaper. A quartz composition is after all just maybe over 1MB as against those heavy WMV files...

As for me, that deskscape of stardock's, the most popular one, its about those different planets revolving and stars n stuff, that one takes in about 20% of CPU... which makes my CPU fan start to whine...


----------



## iMav (Jun 16, 2007)

goobimama said:
			
		

> those heavy WMV files...


 i enjoy watching movies and music videos as my wallpapers


----------



## goobimama (Jun 16, 2007)

^ With all the icons cluttering it up? At least if windows had something like the upcoming "stacks"...


----------



## iMav (Jun 16, 2007)

goobimama said:
			
		

> ^ With all the icons cluttering it up? At least if windows had something like the upcoming "stacks"...


 well in vista u can just right click and under view u have the hide all desktop icon option


----------



## goobimama (Jun 16, 2007)

Hmm.... anyway, my movies don't play with dreamscene anyway. But whatever works for you guys. It is subjective after all...

Also, for "cut" option within finder
- if one is dragging within the drive, it automatically moves it.
- If one wants to move the file from one drive to another (say external to internal), Command + Shift + drag moves the file...


----------



## iMav (Jun 16, 2007)

^^ yup figured that out before    thanx anyways ...


----------



## aryayush (Jun 16, 2007)

goobimama said:
			
		

> - If one wants to move the file from one drive to another (say external to internal), Command + Shift + drag moves the file...


Even 'Shift' is not required, just 'Command + drag' does the job.


----------



## gxsaurav (Jun 16, 2007)

goobimama said:
			
		

> ^ With all the icons cluttering it up? At least if windows had something like the upcoming "stacks"...


Stacks, you mean the ability to make a virtual or real folder which holds files of a specific criteria or all files inside a folder & then shows them either as a menu or grid? Oh. I guess you mean something like this which is there in Windows XP & Vista too.....

*img475.imageshack.us/img475/356/stacksef5.jpg

I m working on some sort of registry hack by which we can add our own custom folders to start menu & show them in a menu like above. If it works, some developer can make it an application too 



> Even 'Shift' is not required, just 'Command + drag' does the job.


Even command is not required. *In Vista just drag will move anywhere whether it is same drive or different drive*


----------



## goobimama (Jun 16, 2007)

^^^ yaaak thu!


----------



## aryayush (Jun 16, 2007)

[sarcasm]WOW! That is exactly what stacks does. Superb, man! [/sarcasm]


----------



## gxsaurav (Jun 16, 2007)

Yup, the only thing good about Mac,* it looks got. *Apple just copied a function from Vista & slapped flashing looks on it.



			
				aryayush said:
			
		

> [sarcasm]WOW! That is exactly what stacks does. Superb, man! [/sarcasm]



Oh, so you see some other functionality too? let us all know


----------



## goobimama (Jun 16, 2007)

As for "just draggin" in vista, it copies the file, not move it *between drives*. Of course, if you right-click+drag it, it gives you that context menu which can then move it...


----------



## gxsaurav (Jun 16, 2007)

goobimama said:
			
		

> As for "just draggin" in vista, it copies the file, not move it *between drives*. Of course, if you right-click+drag it, it gives you that context menu which can then move it...



Yup, & thats why we also have the cut option & SentoTo menu


----------



## iMav (Jun 17, 2007)

vista: 2 mouse buttons = move, copy, create short cut (consistent for every where)
mac: 2 mouse buttons just 1 function = copy between drives, move within drive  what a genius


----------



## blackleopard92 (Jun 17, 2007)

iMav said:
			
		

> vista: 2 mouse buttons = move, copy, create short cut (consistent for every where)
> mac: 2 mouse buttons just 1 function = copy between drives, move within drive  what a genius


and if i want to copy within a drive ( a backup) and move betweem drives??? so much for defaults.


----------



## iMav (Jun 17, 2007)

^  did not get ur statement


----------



## sakumar79 (Jun 17, 2007)

aryayush said:
			
		

> Look, I have been severely mistaken before but I think you really are inquisitive about how a Mac works. If you are seriously interested, I'm going to solve all your doubts. My only request is, please do not pull another gx_saurav on me!
> 
> I'll reply to your last post later today. I've got to go somewhere right now.



I havent yet got your reply yet... Not sure why? 
Possibility 1: You forgot about it... In which case, this is a reminder...
Possibility 2: You have somehow gotten the silly notion that I am going to pull another gx on you... Fact is, I am a Windows user now, and all I am planning to do now is read your statements, clarify any misconceptions I have about Mac, and also clarify any misconceptions YOU may have about Windows...
Possibility 3: You have figured that I was right about Explorer being faster to use than Finder when it comes to move through tree and move through spring-loaded folders and want to avoid further comments on your side...
Possibilities 4,5,6,...: I have run out of ideas on what other reasons might have caused you to skip answering my post, so if it is none of the above, please let me know...

If you feel that I am wrong about Explorer being faster with drag-drop, please give detailed steps on how you do it with Finder, because the way I have visualized it (as detailed in my earlier post), I would consider Explorer to be faster...

If you are not interested in posting your reply on the thread, please PM me also... Though I would prefer that you post it in the thread because this information will benefit all...

Arun


----------



## iMav (Jun 17, 2007)

some facts:

the world is round
os x is flawed
windows is the highest seller
arya has realised this


----------



## gxsaurav (Jun 17, 2007)

Or....he is out of articles on the net to copy paste


----------



## Zeeshan Quireshi (Jun 17, 2007)

gx_saurav said:
			
		

> Or....he is out of articles on the net to copy paste


lolz


----------



## aryayush (Jun 18, 2007)

sakumar79 said:
			
		

> I havent yet got your reply yet... Not sure why?
> Possibility 1: You forgot about it... In which case, this is a reminder...
> Possibility 2: You have somehow gotten the silly notion that I am going to pull another gx on you... Fact is, I am a Windows user now, and all I am planning to do now is read your statements, clarify any misconceptions I have about Mac, and also clarify any misconceptions YOU may have about Windows...
> Possibility 3: You have figured that I was right about Explorer being faster to use than Finder when it comes to move through tree and move through spring-loaded folders and want to avoid further comments on your side...
> ...


The first one was the reason and thanks for the gentle reminder, unlike the posts that followed. 

This is the sort of thing that would ideally require a video to explain but I am on an EDGE connection and uploading a video is completely out of the question. So I'll try to do my best with simple, old-fashioned text.

This is the best view of the Finder, the column view:

*img519.imageshack.us/img519/4531/findercolumnviewkn9.png

The Finder is better than Windows Explorer because the latter has got nothing _exactly similar_ to the column view in the Finder, at least for me. Yes, it has got a whole lot of options and views that combined can sorta-kinda do what the column view basically does, but it does _not_ have the column view. I know it sounds very dogmatic, but this is what works for me and I prefer it. It might not work for you and you might prefer Explorer. No big deal. But if a person can use Mac OS X after having used Windows and still prefer the former, there _is_ something fundamentally wrong with that person!

About spring loaded folders (and it is not just limited to folders, it is everywhere in the operating system) - it would never really work in Windows because you have a single window concept in Windows. Windows users generally prefer to just maximise the whole window (even on a thirty-inch monster) and work in it. They need something like that tree navigation thing in Vista. Mac users like to have many windows of various sizes all over the screen. It helps you multi-task better and Exposé is brilliant at handling hundreds of Windows, quite literally. Just imagine what the taskbar in Windows would look like if you had thirty windows open.

About what you were asking - when I connect my external HDD to transfer the files from my downloads folder to the various folders in it, I just select my files, drag them to the icon in the sidebar and hit space bar. The HDD opens and I drag them to the appropriate folder. Hit 'Delete', back to the downloads folder. After that it is basically rinse and repeat. Another way is to hit 'Command + N' and then drag and drop between the two windows.

I know what you are thinking, "but how is this better than Windows?" It isn't. For you, it isn't. For me, it is. Vista's Explorer is a huge improvement over XP's so I haven't got much to say against it, but I do prefer spring loaded folders to the tiny targets in that tree view on the side in Vista. Plus, it gels in with the rest of the OS which supports drag and drop completely and encourages you to use the mouse more often. 

I hope I've been able to get my message across. Even if I haven't, I am so not interested in discussing this any more. These things are really difficult to explain unless someone is sitting near you. I can assure you this, however, that I do not know any human being who has used Mac OS X and disliked it or preferred Windows to it.


----------



## iMav (Jun 18, 2007)

OMG the tone has changed dramatically, now its statements like it suits me better .... gx mission completed


----------



## gxsaurav (Jun 18, 2007)

lolz...arya is still trying to spread misconseption about Explorer. I will post some eye openers for him & other members tomorrow, right now I m not even at home :yawn:



			
				aryayush said:
			
		

> The Finder is better than Windows Explorer because the latter has got nothing _exactly similar_ to the column view in the Finder, at least for me. Yes, it has got a whole lot of options and views that combined can sorta-kinda do what the column view basically does, but it does _not_ have the column view.



*Column view goes back one folder at a time, this means you cannot jump 5 folder back directly. However in tree view you can go from anywhere to anywhere using the tree navigation. You don't even need to open the multiple windows.*



> But if a person can use Mac OS X after having used Windows and still prefer the former, *there is something fundamentally wrong with that person!*


*
 Now this is true fanboy statement. Is it required for me to like it if you like? Am I an idiot just cos I like tree navigation better?*



> you have a single window concept in Windows. Windows users generally prefer to just maximise the whole window (even on a thirty-inch monster) and work in it.



Spring Loaded folders cannot be used in Windows because Apple holds a patent for it.

Windows users can either maximise a window to full screen or set the size from any side on such a big monitor. *Mac users cannot Maximise a Window
*


> Mac users like to have many windows of various sizes all over the screen. It helps you multi-task better and Exposé is brilliant at handling hundreds of Windows, quite literally. Just imagine what the taskbar in Windows would look like if you had thirty windows open.



Windows users have this ability to open as many Windows as they like. *Taskbar will simply group them together.  FlipTab will show all of them together. *Example & eye opener you can see here. We have been multitasking from years & Mac does not mean thats the only way to multitask.

*img391.imageshack.us/img391/3995/windowszj8.th.jpg
*
On a big monitor, you can simply select to hide the taskbar automatically & double the size of Taskbar so that you can see all Windows open at once. In Mac, dock doesn't groups windows of similar apps together when minimised.*



> About what you were asking - when I connect my external HDD to transfer the files from my downloads folder to the various folders in it, *I just select my files, drag them to the icon in the sidebar and hit space bar. The HDD opens and I drag them to the appropriate folder*. Hit 'Delete', back to the downloads folder. After that it is basically rinse and repeat. Another way is to hit 'Command + N' and then drag and drop between the two windows.



No, you are saying it wrong. When using spring loaded folder, when u make a drag pile & drag it over a folder & then spring load it, you cannot put individual files in individual folders. You either put them all together in the same folder & then you sort as required. Let me know if there is something like Windows JumpTab in Mac 



> Plus, it gels in with the rest of the OS which supports drag and drop completely and encourages you to use the mouse more often.



Windows can work the drag & drop way as well as the tree view way. Mac can only work as drag & drop way, which proves that Explorer gives more flexibility then Finder 



> I do not know any human being who has used Mac OS X and disliked it or preferred Windows to it.



Then either you mean that all the Windows/Linux users who did not like Mac are not human beings, or u are just like your Boss, acting like a smug.

*I forgot to mention. Finder is very inefficient when it comes to Icon Management.*

*Mac OS X uses .icns file format for Icons which are in Tiger up to 128X128 pixel size. On Windows Vista we have up to 256X256 pixel icons* which are quite big & if you have a 30 Inch Display (Example) they even suit it. *Vista is very much resolution independent.*

*The ICO format used in Windows Vista, even at full size has lower file size* then anything on Finder. *MacOS X saves each state & size of an Icon as an individual bitmap & groups them together in the .icns container.* It requires 16pix, 24pix,32,pix,48pix, 128pix, 256pix & 512pix (for Leopard only) *This results in huge file size.*

Windows Vista & Explorer on the other hand just require the 16pix, 24pix,32pix,48pix & 256X256 pix compressed PNG, all grouped together in .ico container. *Due to using a Compressed PNG for size above 48 pix, the icons size in Vista is very low compared to Mac OS X. *

What does this mean? When you see something on screen, & there are many big icons, then that particular state of bitmap is loaded in memory of the GPU. Mac OS X isn't that efficient cos it loads a bit .icns, while Vista simply loads the PNG in .ico & discards the rest of the icon sizes when showing on screen cos those are there only for backward compatibility with Windows XP.

You can see yourself, this is a custom made notepad icon which I use in my Computer.

*img216.imageshack.us/img216/36/notesgg9.png

Download the Windows Icon

Download the Mac Icon

PNG is 74 kb
.ico for Windows Vista is 95 kb
.icns for Mac OS X is 354 kb even when I did not include the 512X512 state.


----------



## sakumar79 (Jun 18, 2007)

@aryayush, thanks for the reply... 
1. The column view seems to be a very nice concept... It can be quite useful while copying/moving files to subfolders, etc...
2. Regarding multi-tasking, I never have 30 application windows open, so I havent faced clutter in the taskbar... I dont chat much, my browser is tabbed, and XP groups my office docs together when necessary... I can even drag my taskbar to have two or three lines of tabs... And when I occasionally need to work on multiple things simultaneously (image processing on one side, browsing on another side, etc), I use this software called multiDesk. It is a 3rd party software providing similar features to the Windows Power Toy providing me virtual desktops to group similar tasks in one virtual desktop and navigate easily between one set of tasks and another...
4. I dont know about other users, but when I use a large monitor (at home, I have 17" only, but I have worked with larger screens before), I set the explorer window custom size to cover half or one-third of the screen width, and when I open two or more of them, I can easily view both simultaneously...
5. Im not a frequent user of drag-and-drop, but till date I havent any problem with using tree navigation to drag-drop... IMHO, the power of working with keyboard+mouse is much more convenient than just mouse.
6. Just a doubt, but if you have windows of all sizes on your desktop, would it not be harder to work within each of those windows... Will it not involve more scrolling? Suppose I am working on a spreadsheet, and I have to reference various cells for a formula, will not a smaller size make it harder to work? In this case, I think that maximising the window will be useful so that amount of scrolling is reduced... 
7. Dont you think your comments like "But if a person can use Mac OS X after having used Windows and still prefer the former, there is something fundamentally wrong with that person!", "I can assure you this, however, that I do not know any human being who has used Mac OS X and disliked it or preferred Windows to it" are very strong words? I can give you a few reasons why people can still prefer Windows - (a) much wider 3rd party software base (for example, I am a structural consultant, and design software choices for windows is much more than for mac... In fact, I dont think that there is even one software available to design buildings using Indian Standard Codes... I could be wrong, but if you compare the number of choices, you will realize Windows has the advantage). (b) much better gaming platform (no need to elaborate, I hope). (c) Choice of hardware (again, no need to elaborate, I hope. I know Apple thinks it is its USP, but personally, it is one more strike against it, because I love assembling computers by myself). And I can tell you people you know who have used it and still preferred Windows - gxsaurav and iMav... Sure, you can state that they may be MS fanboys, but the statement will still need a little rewording.

8. Regarding my other points in the earlier post, I would like your comments... For you convenience, I am posting it here
-----
Secondly, you said convenience is the reason and I dont get it. I said you can do the same in windows (use scripts, run 2 copies of any app, close multiple apps very quickly) and you say mac is convenient. Please elaborate...

Thirdly, in windows, you can turn off auto arrange and use align to grid. I hope you are aware of that... I use it regularly. For example, you can keep your system shortcuts in one group on the top left corner of the desktop, your browsing apps in another group at the top right corner, office apps at bottom left corner and games in bottom right corner. All these will be aligned to grid. Is this what you are trying to say is missing, or did I misunderstand you?
-----

Arun


----------



## gxsaurav (Jun 18, 2007)

sakumar79 said:
			
		

> And when I occasionally need to work on multiple things simultaneously (image processing on one side, browsing on another side, etc), I use this software called multiDesk. It is a 3rd party software providing similar features to the Windows Power Toy providing me virtual desktops to group similar tasks in one virtual desktop and navigate easily between one set of tasks and another...



A very good technology indeed, too bad it came to Leopard years after it came on Windows with nView.


----------



## Quiz_Master (Jun 18, 2007)

After this debate....
Best of all Windows has a larger user base.... 
   + There are addons for explorer....
+ Explorer is more user friendly... + Windows PC are cheap compared to MACs


----------



## infra_red_dude (Jun 18, 2007)

Quiz_Master said:
			
		

> Windows PC are cheap compared to MACs



there it goes again.... brace urselves for another fight now!


----------



## Zeeshan Quireshi (Jun 18, 2007)

aryayush said:
			
		

> I can assure you this, however, that I do not know any human being who has used Mac OS X and disliked it or preferred Windows to it.


 *does this mean I , Saurav n iMav are not human beings * 



			
				aryayush said:
			
		

> About spring loaded folders (and it is not just limited to folders, it is everywhere in the operating system) - it would never really work in Windows


 *Well XP n Vista both have this functionality in Tree view .*

When explorer is open , Just click on Folders in toolbar to switch to tree view , now drag a file over any folder in tree view and if you wait over a folder , then that folder expands to reveal subfolders and like this for every folder.

*farm2.static.flickr.com/1105/563586524_44fa02bc18_o.jpg


----------



## sakumar79 (Jun 18, 2007)

@Zeeshan, the popup nature of tree in Explorer has already been discussed. With Mac, you can bypass the waiting time for the popup by pressing space, but I dont think there is such an option in Explorer... However, if you browse to the destination first in the tree view, it is slightly faster and more convenient than using spring-loaded folders IMHO (but aryayush disagreed, and we should respect his opinion and leave it at that)...

On a side note: You like Dragonball Z? So do I...

Arun


----------



## aryayush (Jun 18, 2007)

I did NOT disagree. As soon as you guys told me that the drop-down menu in the tree view expands when you hold something over it, I agreed that it is pretty much similar to spring loaded folders then. The smaller targets are still an inconvenience though and the fact that you cannot speed up the process. But like I said, it is great if it works for you. 

However, nothing in Windows is similar to the column view and that is the biggest gripe I have with Windows Explorer.



			
				sakumar79 said:
			
		

> I never have 30 application windows open


That's because you use Windows. I know you will disagree now but it is a fact that window management in Windows is pathetic and that is the reason why Windows users prefer to have a lesser number of windows open. Seeing more than ten windows in the taskbar would give anyone a headache. And just don't get me started on the brilliant "feature" of the taskbar that clubs all the windows of applications together. The first thing I do when I install XP on a machine is turn that stupid thing off. Window management on Windows, despite its name, is Hell.



			
				sakumar79 said:
			
		

> I use this software called multiDesk. It is a 3rd party software providing similar features to the Windows Power Toy providing me virtual desktops to group similar tasks in one virtual desktop and navigate easily between one set of tasks and another...


You disagreed with me when I called your friends in this thread a bunch of dunderheads. There's a reason for that and it is clear in posts like this one:





			
				gx_saurav said:
			
		

> A very good technology indeed, too bad it came to Leopard years after it came on Windows with nView.


You be the judge here. Does Windows come with virtual desktops built-in? No, it does not. You use free or paid tools from third parties and Microsoft to enable the functionality. Does Tiger come with virtual desktops built-in? No, it does not. You use free or paid tools from third parties to enable the functionality. So what is the difference between Vista and Tiger in this regard - none. Does Leopard come with virtual desktops built-in? Yes, it does and if you have seen a demo, you know that it is the most functional and slickest implementation of it. Mac OS X scores. And yet, you see posts like the one I quoted. This forum is full of such typical nonsense. And you expect me to regard their opinions seriously! 



			
				gx_saurav said:
			
		

> Just a doubt, but if you have windows of all sizes on your desktop, would it not be harder to work within each of those windows... Will it not involve more scrolling? Suppose I am working on a spreadsheet, and I have to reference various cells for a formula, will not a smaller size make it harder to work? In this case, I think that maximising the window will be useful so that amount of scrolling is reduced...


Windows that need to be worked on in full screen mode do support it. For example, MS Excel covers the whole screen when you hit the zoom button. But when you open Apple's official website and hit the zoom button, Safari will only use the screen space required to properly fit the website's contents, not more than that. It is _much_ more efficient. And, in any case, if you insist on working in full screen with everything (though it is thoroughly inadvisable and I am sure you won't want to do it when you have the power of Exposé at your disposal), there is a free plug-in called megazoomer that does it. I use it and it works perfectly. Having said that, it sure would have been better if Apple provided an option full screen mode too for every application. But, to emphasise on what I said earlier, applications that require full screen do have it even now. And, of course, you can always resize a window to occupy the full screen once and it will always remember that setting. 



			
				sakumar79 said:
			
		

> Secondly, you said convenience is the reason and I dont get it. I said you can do the same in windows (use scripts, run 2 copies of any app, close multiple apps very quickly) and you say mac is convenient. Please elaborate...


How can I explain this to you when you have not used the operating system yourself! Anyway, here's an example. How do you install Yahoo! Messenger on Windows and how do you work with two instances of it?
1. Download the installer.
2. Run it and it will download another file that is about thirteen megabytes or something.
3. Next, next, next, next (uncheck all the stupid options), Finish.
Suppose your brother is also using Yahoo! Messenger and you hadn't thought of that earlier but you do not want him to use it.
4. Go to the 'Add and Remove Programs' thing and use the uninstaller.
5. Again, repeat steps 1-3 but install it in a private folder this time round.
Suppose you want to run two instances of it. How do you do it?
6. Repeat steps 1-3 and install it somewhere else and maybe you need to use a hack or something. I don't know how it works but since gx_saurav showed a screenshot of it, I am assuming it works.

How to do the above routine on Mac OS X?
1. Download the DMG file.
2. Copy the application from it to your Applications folder (or anywhere else) and run it. (You could also have run it directly from the DMG file.)
Now, how to move it to a private folder?
3. Drag the application to your private folder. Done.
How to run two instances of it?
4. Right click, duplicate. Done.
Uninstallation?
5. Drag it to the Trash.

This is what I call convenience and I respect it.



			
				sakumar79 said:
			
		

> Thirdly, in windows, you can turn off auto arrange and use align to grid. I hope you are aware of that... I use it regularly. For example, you can keep your system shortcuts in one group on the top left corner of the desktop, your browsing apps in another group at the top right corner, office apps at bottom left corner and games in bottom right corner. All these will be aligned to grid. Is this what you are trying to say is missing, or did I misunderstand you?


I listed that feature because gx_saurav was intent on listing the tiniest of features in his review. It isn't a big deal. Anyway, the feature is that when you drag a file and leave it with the Command key pressed, it aligns itself to grid. It is not a very big deal, just a handy little feature.


----------



## goobimama (Jun 18, 2007)

Here's my views on the subject of Drag and Drop:

When I was first researching whether or not to go for the iBook. When I went to the Apple Corner, the owner of the store showed me how to use OS X. And I was like, "What about maximizing and fullscreen?", "Why is there no taskbar" when he finally told me to sit down, and said this which I now stand by.

You can't bring along your windows baggage with you. The way you used to do things, which you used to do things, which may seem really efficient to you, must be left behind. Because when you use OS X, its a totally different working environment. But don't get scared that you might be lost, because when you work with OS X, it just flows. I'm guaranteeing you, that if you work "with an open mind" (GX?), within two weeks, you will agree all that I've said.

And I did go back and tell him that OS X was amazing. Even my dad, a long standing MS user since maybe 1988 or so, was really amazed by the ease of use and efficiency of doing things.

I don't know how or why finder is more efficient at dealing with files, but it is. And it looks good while doing that. It may be the little things like:

- Using hot corners for "Show Desktop" while holding a file in hand. Or even using Expose, to select among different folders.

- The fact that if you are in say User>system>music>rock>and you happen to want to listen to some gay music like Backstreet boys, you just enter backstreet into the search bar, and it searches that "rock" folder. This is the same with Vista upto now. But with OS X, there are a couple of tabs at the top which directly allow you to search "Documents", "Entire Computer", "This HDD" (though the wordings are different). Vista doesn't have this.

- The fact that if I want to move a say newly downloaded file from the desktop to User>system>music>rock, I have to actually open explorer. But with OS X, I just drag the file to the Mac HDD icon, it automatically opens up a window, you navigate with the mouse while holding the file, drop it, and the window automatically closes, with some sparky animation!

It may not be those things, I don't know. But when I work with a Mac, I instinctively move my pointer to the top left to show me all my windows, squeeze side mousebuttons for Desktop, and the file just goes wherever I want it to.


----------



## aryayush (Jun 18, 2007)

gx_saurav said:
			
		

> this is a custom made notepad icon which I use in my Computer.
> 
> *img216.imageshack.us/img216/36/notesgg9.png


I've tried to give you some constructive criticism before and have been scarred by the experience. So, I don't expect anything from you this time round but I cannot resist commenting on this abominable icon.
It sucks. What were you thinking! You just took the original Notepad icon and added the pen from another icon in Vista. WOW! What an expert! And the light sources on the two icons are coming from different places. The shadow of the notebook is falling behind it while the pen's shadow is falling to the left of it. What lunacy is this anyway!



			
				goobimama said:
			
		

> Here's my views on the subject of Drag and Drop:
> 
> When I was first researching whether or not to go for the iBook. When I went to the Apple Corner, the owner of the store showed me how to use OS X. And I was like, "What about maximizing and fullscreen?", "Why is there no taskbar" when he finally told me to sit down, and said this which I now stand by.
> 
> ...


Spot on. As you can see, it is very difficult to explain things. OS X is just more efficient and there are no two ways about it. Exposé is the best feature ever on any operating system. Like I've said many times before, it single-handedly makes Mac OS X a better operating system than Windows Vista.

What he described is the exact same thing that I experienced and I also phoned back the salesman, who had enthusiastically given me the tour of Mac OS X and had been very patient with what I later realised were silly questions, to thank him for goading me into buying a Mac. You have to use it, with the desire to learn something new without the preconceived notion that it cannot be good, to feel the difference. For instance, you have to be willing to understand that minimising windows is not the most efficient way of managing them. This is just one of the many conventions that you have to let go. The only times I minimise windows is when I am doing something and someone comes into the room and I wish to hide that particular window (and no, I do not indulge in porn and stuff - I am just talking about hiding fun things like the Digit forum when I'm supposed to be working on Photoshop!) but not all the windows of that application.

I think goobimama put it perfectly with this paragraph:





			
				goobimama said:
			
		

> You can't bring along your windows baggage with you. The way you used to do things, which you used to do things, which may seem really efficient to you, must be left behind. Because when you use OS X, its a totally different working environment. But don't get scared that you might be lost, because when you work with OS X, it just flows. I'm guaranteeing you, that if you work "with an open mind" (GX?), within two weeks, you will agree all that I've said.


When you are talking about Mac OS X, or using it - always remember these words.


----------



## Zeeshan Quireshi (Jun 18, 2007)

aryayush said:
			
		

> I've tried to give you some constructive criticism before and have been scarred by the experience. So, I don't expect anything from you this time round but I cannot resist commenting on this abominable icon.
> It sucks. What were you thinking! You just took the original Notepad icon and added the pen from another icon in Vista. WOW! What an expert! And the light sources on the two icons are coming from different places. The shadow of the notebook is falling behind it while the pen's shadow is falling to the left of it. What lunacy is this anyway!


 Aryayush , it was an example to compare Icon size in Windows and Mac , not how beautiful this icon is .


----------



## Quiz_Master (Jun 18, 2007)

aryayush said:
			
		

> I've tried to give you some constructive criticism before and have been scarred by the experience. So, I don't expect anything from you this time round but I cannot resist commenting on this abominable icon.
> It sucks. What were you thinking! You just took the original Notepad icon and added the pen from another icon in Vista. WOW! What an expert! And the light sources on the two icons are coming from different places. The shadow of the notebook is falling behind it while the pen's shadow is falling to the left of it. What lunacy is this anyway!



gx_saurav wasn't showing off his graphic skills he was just saying that ICON features and icon handling in windows explorer of vista is much better then that of Mac OS X. Now when you were losing you just changed the topic.

He said The size of .ico file is much smaller then icnn (or whatever) file of Mac. 
So you see he wasn't showing off that how he created that notepad icon. He was just showing the difference between both Mac and Windows Icon files. Right?

~PEACE~


----------



## goobimama (Jun 18, 2007)

maybe aayush shouldn't have hammered on gx's imaging skills, but for what its worth, all the icons on my Mac, 128x128, are not more than 70kb, most of them are ~50k.

Here's a get info of two of the more complex icons:
*img260.imageshack.us/img260/1177/picture2pj6.png


----------



## iMav (Jun 18, 2007)

arya just coz we dont open 35 windows at the same doesnt mean explorer is inefficient it means its so freakin efficient that the work of 30 windows can be done by opening 3 windows ... finder does it have up oops sorry unlike windows theres no up button at the top either go back or forth

next every1 arya is right for the first time:

i am not a human being im an alien from Zenn-La ... im the silver surfer


----------



## aryayush (Jun 18, 2007)

Quiz_Master said:
			
		

> gx_saurav wasn't showing off his graphic skills he was just saying that ICON features and icon handling in windows explorer of vista is much better then that of Mac OS X. Now when you were losing you just changed the topic.
> 
> He said The size of .ico file is much smaller then icnn (or whatever) file of Mac.
> So you see he wasn't showing off that how he created that notepad icon. He was just showing the difference between both Mac and Windows Icon files. Right?
> ...


Why is there so much misinterpretation going on here? I know why he showed that icon and I also know he wasn't showing off his designing skills. My comments were meant to be taken as an aside. I just said it so he could fix the particularly obvious fault with the shadows.

And BTW, like goobimama said, the icons on Mac OS X do not have massive sizes like gx_saurav said (read lied).

Also, in the Finder, you can set any image (JPG, PNG, GIF... what have you) as the icon for any file, so you do not need to depend on the iCNS format either.



			
				iMav said:
			
		

> finder does it have up oops sorry unlike windows theres no up button at the top either go back or forth


Even if we leave the completely pathetic language skills aside, you are very wrong. The 'Back' and 'Forward' buttons are right there by default and the 'Up' button, though not there by default because you do not need it, can be added by right clicking on it and customising the toolbar.


----------



## iMav (Jun 18, 2007)

Arya - the genius, the language skills u r talking about is 1 thing i can beat u anytime anywhere , I will certainly remember that next time i post in a topic remotely related to you i will be grammatically precise.

Secondly, the phrase 'because you do not need it' is an absurd statement simply because if u (as in u - arya) were able to tell what 1000s of people need and don't need you would have been a phenomenon all across the world - which unfortunately isn't the case as of now (not ruling out a possibility in the future), just because u do not use something doesn't mean no 1 else uses it, as i said what 30 windows in mac allow you to do (what u refer to as multi-tasking) windows allows u to do it in 3, because we have trees - which means any location can be accessed easily (by that i mean without having to change the window contents u are working in) unlike finder, where u will have to 'spring' to every location and changing the window contents u are in (i hope ur  brain is able to decode what i meant by that) or open another 'not required' window


----------



## gxsaurav (Jun 18, 2007)

aryayush said:
			
		

> I've tried to give you some constructive criticism before and have been scarred by the experience. So, I don't expect anything from you this time round but I cannot resist commenting on this abominable icon.
> It sucks. What were you thinking! You just took the original Notepad icon and added the pen from another icon in Vista. WOW! What an expert! And the light sources on the two icons are coming from different places. The shadow of the notebook is falling behind it while the pen's shadow is falling to the left of it. What lunacy is this anyway!


I slapped 2 icons, just to show you. Is it hard to understand?



> maybe aayush shouldn't have hammered on gx's imaging skills, but for what its worth, all the icons on my Mac, 128x128, are not more than 70kb, most of them are ~50k.


That is just for the particular Icon state. I tried your method of using an Icon to use as my Vista parition icon in Mac, guess what, there us no copy option. I dragged & droped the file to the "preview" section & it copied to the Vista drive.

Mac OS X has individual image for each state, Windows Vista has just one PNG, Thats it, That does it all. The Lowest file size icon for Vista contains just one 256X256 PNG compressed in the .ico container



> And BTW, like goobimama said, the icons on Mac OS X do not have massive sizes like gx_saurav said (read lied).


Vista has 256X256 icons which are resolution independent. If you use a screen resolution 1600X1200, this size does helps. When I use the Macintosh Icon format here with Icon workshop & export a Windows Icon as Mac icon this is how it comes out to be.



			
				iMav said:
			
		

> just because u do not use something doesn't mean no 1 else uses it, as i said *what 30 windows in mac allow you to do (what u refer to as multi-tasking) windows allows u to do it in 3*, because we have trees


Right said, why open 5 Finder Windows when we can do everything we need using the tree view in just one Windows, which also allows me to full screen


----------



## goobimama (Jun 18, 2007)

What do you mean particular icon state? A file size is a file size. If I put it in a folder, and Get info, it shows the same size. Not sure what your 'state' thing is here.

As for copy paste thing for the Vista drive, you are using that NTFS thing right? Cause otherwise I couldn't change it. 

You mentioned you pasted in the "Preview section". That's not the place. You see that tiny little icon right on the top of my screenshots? Where the file name is? That's where you first click on it to highlight, and then paste. It'll change right away.


----------



## aryayush (Jun 18, 2007)

Aw, shoot! Did you have to mention that! He couldn't have figured it out himself if his life depended on it.


----------



## goobimama (Jun 18, 2007)

Do you even know what resolution independent means? Cause I think I've got the wrong end of the stick.

From what I've heard, and what I hear could be wrong, tts when the menubar or taskbar, mouse pointers, stuff like that is independent of what resolution you are using. They will stay the same size no matter what resolution you are using. Having just large icons doesn't mean resolution independent. It could mean high resolution friendly... (like those weird 15inch laptops with 1920*1200 resolution)


----------



## gxsaurav (Jun 19, 2007)

Goobi, you got it all wrong. Resolution independence means no matter what resolution u r using, the icons, text, menus will never be stretched cos that is all Vector based unlike current Raster based system we use. 

This will also result in high DPI in displays, which will get rid of those tiny fonts on 30" Display.


----------



## aryayush (Jun 19, 2007)

No, you are wrong and goobimama is right, IMHO. Resolution independence means that no matter what the resolution of the screen is, the user interface elements of the operating system will always have the same size. This includes, but is not limited to, the mouse pointer, menu bar, taskbar, buttons, icons, etc. For example, a 128 pixel icon will have the same size on both a 1680x1050 resolution 17-inch screen and a 1900x1200 resolution 17-inch screen. However, it will differ on screens with different sizes. That is why they call it "resolution" independence. It has got nothing to do with the icon sizes. However, Windows Vista is resolution independent and so is Leopard. Tiger isn't.

I do admit though, that I am not _absolutely_ sure what resolution independence it, but I do think that I am right about the basic concept. Maybe someone else who knows about this could clear it up.


----------



## sakumar79 (Jun 19, 2007)

Regarding resolution independence, heres a link to a Wikipedia article:
*en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Resolution_independence

I think all are saying the same thing, only slightly differently...
Also, I think gx_saurav is saying (in reply to goobimama's note that all his 128x128 icons are less than 70kb) that in mac, if you want to create an icon and set it for various sizes like 128pix, 64 pix, 32 pix, etc, each will be created as individual bitmaps saved together in one file, and so the file size is large (not for the icon of one size, but for the same icons in various sizes). I dont know if that is true, so, I will let the mac users to say whether the statement is correct or not...

Now regarding drag-and-drop, thanks for the input from goobimama and aryayush... But, like I have stated, I dont have access to a Mac until my brother comes by for a visit (which will probably be next year only). BTW, do you guys know where in Chennai I can try out a Mac? I may be going there in a couple of months, and if I get some spare time, I would like to try out some of the things I am learning here...

@aryayush, I dont open 30 windows, not because of inefficiency of windows, but because I dont need it... Most of the software I use have MDI interface, so theres just one tab on the taskbar even if I have multiple documents... At a time, I dont need to run more than 10 applications simultaneously (typically, there may be less than 5 only). This has nothing to do with windows efficiency of Explorer. Can you give me a list of the 30 windows that you have open?

@aryayush, on a side note, I have noticed that occasionally (three times recently I think) you have put the wrong author name in your quotes (in this and other posts. Just a request to keep the name correct.

Regarding Virtual Desktops: Please confirm if Tiger has a free download for virtual desktops, and if it is their own software or if it is third party. Its not clear what you had said earlier... Personally, I dont mind if the functionality of virtual desktop is available built into the OS or it is available separately, but for this discussion, it is available in Leopard and not in Vista and that should be it. (However, I noticed that Apple was trying to word it as if it was a totally new concept without any mention about the phrase 'virtual desktops'. Also, when I searched for "leopard spaces" in google, the first two links where apple webpages, but the first one was a dead link). And no, I dont expect you to hold their opinion seriously the same way that I dont expect them to hold yours seriously... But I am not interested in that.

The same way that you dont want to consider virtual desktop as it is not a built-in feature of Windows, I think we should not consider megazoomer for the sake of this discussion. I know you did not put it there for the sake of this discussion, but for giving me the info, so thanks for the info.

Regarding running multiple instances, there are very few software (such as Y!) which dont allow you to run multiple instances... They are limitations placed by the software manufacturer and not by Windows. So, I dont think we should discuss it here... Also, the file size of the application depends on the manufacturer. On a side note, I am interested to know the size of the DMG file for Y! compared to the total download size in Windows... Also, is all functionality in Windows version available in Mac version (pc2pc and pc2phone calling, plugins, radio, etc)? I dont use it, but just want to know...

Arun


----------



## Avatar (Jun 19, 2007)

Both Goobimama and Saurav are right, definition by Goobimama is more precise. Funny thing is you both don't agree with each other while saying the same thing.


----------



## gxsaurav (Jun 19, 2007)

aryayush said:
			
		

> No, you are wrong and goobimama is right, IMHO. Resolution independence means that no matter what the resolution of the screen is, the user interface elements of the operating system will always have the same size. This includes, but is not limited to, the mouse pointer, menu bar, taskbar, buttons, icons, etc. For example, *a 128 pixel icon will have the same size on both a 1680x1050 resolution 17-inch screen and a 1900x1200 resolution 17-inch screen*. However, it will differ on screens with different sizes. That is why they call it "resolution" independence. It has got nothing to do with the icon sizes. However, Windows Vista is resolution independent and so is Leopard. Tiger isn't.


You read photoshop right?  How is this possible? Let me tell you how. Make some image in Illustrator & sve as .EPS file, That is a vector based icon & if you use it on a high resolution screen it will stretch without any quality loss cos unlike Raster, vector is math based so it can be stretched without quality loss



			
				arya said:
			
		

> I do admit though, that I am not _absolutely_ sure what resolution independence it, but I do think that I am right about the basic concept.


Since you don't then better be quite here.

.icns & ico are containers having multiple images of multiple sizes.

This is how a native Windows Vista icon looks like.

*img462.imageshack.us/img462/9207/winrl1.th.jpg

Download here.

This is how a native Mac OS X Icon looks like.

*img462.imageshack.us/img462/962/macpr4.th.jpg

Download here.

Mac size is bigger, & we cannot even remove backword compatibility for OS 9, I mean who uses it now? I can't even slim the icon size.

Now, if you save as PNG well, then it is a different story all together. You need multiple size idvidual png files for multiple states.

I am trying to port some icons to Mac, might help those using bootcamp. Too bad *in Mac we cannot set icon for individual file types like in Windows Vista or Windows XP. *Its not like just select .sys file & change icon for it in Mac cos .sys is not a registered Mac file format

I just followed few things as said by goobi & Arya. They don't work.

1) Seting an image as the icon for a file or drive or even an icns file

I right clicked to "Get Info" on my Vista Drive, the iDisk icon was the default one. Now, I selected the Windows HD.png file & clicked on the top icon asgoobi said & pasted. This is what happened as shown in the video.

Download Video

2) Arya, look here, where is the "Up" button as asked by iMav?

*img224.imageshack.us/img224/3635/untitledcj6.jpg

* The thing we can do in Windows in One click or using one button of mouse, we need to click or mouse button + modifier key on keyboard. Even the righ click menu gives no options *

*img442.imageshack.us/img442/1944/untitledlr1.jpg


----------



## aryayush (Jun 19, 2007)

Dude, you have way too much free time.

Open any image in Safari or any other web browser and copy it from the right click menu. Then open the 'Get Info' window of any file/folder/drive, click on the icon on the top left corner (it will be highlighted in light blue) and paste it. If it does not change, Mac OS X does not like you, and I cannot fault the poor operating system for it.



			
				sakumar79 said:
			
		

> Also, I think gx_saurav is saying (in reply to goobimama's note that all his 128x128 icons are less than 70kb) that in mac, if you want to create an icon and set it for various sizes like 128pix, 64 pix, 32 pix, etc, each will be created as individual bitmaps saved together in one file, and so the file size is large (not for the icon of one size, but for the same icons in various sizes). I dont know if that is true, so, I will let the mac users to say whether the statement is correct or not...


I don't know why he wants to save pictures of various sizes when just one at the largest size will suffice. I just ran a little check and hardly any icon I have is larger than hundred kilobytes.



			
				sakumar79 said:
			
		

> BTW, do you guys know where in Chennai I can try out a Mac?


Yes, there are two _imagine_ Apple Premium Resellers. Go to *www.apple.co.in/ and click on 'Where to Buy'. 



			
				sakumar79 said:
			
		

> @aryayush, on a side note, I have noticed that occasionally (three times recently I think) you have put the wrong author name in your quotes (in this and other posts. Just a request to keep the name correct.


I was unaware of it. I'll be more careful now. 



			
				sakumar79 said:
			
		

> Regarding Virtual Desktops: Please confirm if Tiger has a free download for virtual desktops, and if it is their own software or if it is third party. Its not clear what you had said earlier...


Yes, we have (at least) a free software for virtual desktops and a paid one. None from Apple though because whatever software Apple makes, they bundle it by default except the professional applications. There may be more virtual desktop alternatives but I never bothered with them because none of them comes even close to Spaces.



			
				sakumar79 said:
			
		

> Personally, I dont mind if the functionality of virtual desktop is available built into the OS or it is available separately


I do. I prefer most things to be there by default.



			
				sakumar79 said:
			
		

> The same way that you dont want to consider virtual desktop as it is not a built-in feature of Windows, I think we should not consider megazoomer for the sake of this discussion. I know you did not put it there for the sake of this discussion, but for giving me the info, so thanks for the info.


Thank you for that last line! I just threw it in there because I use it and there is no problem with it. I did say that even I would prefer to have it there by default as a feature of the operating system. But if I was forced to choose between maximise and zoom, I would choose the latter any day. It is just much more efficient. Plus, you can always maximise manually.



			
				sakumar79 said:
			
		

> Regarding running multiple instances, there are very few software (such as Y!) which dont allow you to run multiple instances... They are limitations placed by the software manufacturer and not by Windows. So, I dont think we should discuss it here...


We were talking about convenience and even apart from the multiple instances thing, I would assume that you noticed how the Mac way is a lot more convenient.



			
				sakumar79 said:
			
		

> Also, the file size of the application depends on the manufacturer.


It was not about the file size. It was about the infuriating installing process of Yahoo! Messenger on Windows. Why does it have to download the huge file again and again? It is so frustrating. I know it is not related to Windows though.



			
				sakumar79 said:
			
		

> On a side note, I am interested to know the size of the DMG file for Y! compared to the total download size in Windows...


No idea.



			
				sakumar79 said:
			
		

> Also, is all functionality in Windows version available in Mac version (pc2pc and pc2phone calling, plugins, radio, etc)? I dont use it, but just want to know...


Nope, it isn't. Hardly any functionality is available in the Mac version as of now. Yahoo! has promised to have all the functionality in the next version though. At present, Skype is the king. Adium for text, Skype for calling and iChat for audio/video. It is not the perfect solution but in a few months, Trillian is going to launch a new fully-featured, multi-protocol messenger for Mac. Then we'll talk.


----------



## gxsaurav (Jun 19, 2007)

aryayush said:
			
		

> Open any image in Safari or any other web browser and copy it from the right click menu. Then open the 'Get Info' window of any file/folder/drive, click on the icon on the top left corner (it will be highlighted in light blue) and paste it. If it does not change, Mac OS X does not like you, and I cannot fault the poor operating system for it.


Check the video, I did the same, nothing happened.


> I don't know why he wants to save pictures of various sizes when just one at the largest size will suffice. I just ran a little check and hardly any icon I have is larger than hundred kilobytes.


Try using a 128p image for a 16p icon. You will know why we need different states. The current Icon system used in tiger or leopard is again reaster based. Thats why we need different states of PNG in UI like in case of Linux. ICNS & ICO just combines those PNGs (Example) in one container. In case of Vista, we only need 4 states, 16p,24p (for start menu icons only)32p,48p & 256p PNG



> I would choose the latter any day. It is just much more efficient. Plus, you can always maximise manually.


If it comes to manual resize, Windows Explorer is better. We can resize from any side.



> It was not about the file size. It was about the infuriating installing process of Yahoo! Messenger on Windows. Why does it have to download the huge file again and again? It is so frustrating. I know it is not related to Windows though.


Ever tried looking for alternate sources to get the whole 9 MB installer? Nope, download.com doesn't rings a bell


----------



## iMav (Jun 19, 2007)

arya has smartly ignored and not replied to the posts where his level of genius has been exposed


----------



## gxsaurav (Jun 19, 2007)

iMav said:
			
		

> arya has smartly ignored and not replied to the posts where his level of genius has been exposed



Thats what he always does, cos he is out of articles on the net to copy paste here.


----------



## sakumar79 (Jun 19, 2007)

@aryayush, a few software such as Y! Messenger (and if I remember correctly, Netscape Navigator) had an installer program of small size downloadable first that would then cause the full installation data to be downloaded through the installer's download management tool. This is possibly to help users with dialup connections who may have trouble with cut connections and downloading without special download managers... Netscape had an option where we could instead download the full file separately, and I am guessing that Y!M also has that option, but they dont seem to have made it available (though I did find it elsewhere at *www.softwarepatch.com/software/yahoo-instant-messenger.html ). But, considering that Y! Messenger has much more features in Windows than in Mac, you can expect file sizes to be much different. Having said that, it sounds much cooler to download the installation file and directly start working with the program. Is that the same for all applications or specific to a handful? I ask because some apps in windows also can be run without installation... Also, is there anything like a equivalent to registry in Mac? Any comments on whether it will be useful or not?

BTW, thanks for the info regarding Apple outlets... Turns out there are two reseller stores in Madurai too... I know one of them and it is not too far from my office... I have been there before but dont remember seeing a Mac there... Will have to go there again and check out if they keep macs... If I want to try things out, should I go for reseller store (not sure if they will let me try things out for a long time) or apple authorised service provider or what (options provided on *www.asia.apple.com/buy/locator/ on the second page)

Arun


----------



## goobimama (Jun 19, 2007)

@Arun: I don't think aarya is trying to say that yahoo messenger is better on the mac than on windows. It isn't. The windows version has far more features. I think the point he is trying to make is the ease of use.

Most mac applications, just need to be dragged to the applications folder (or wherever else you might want to keep apps) and are working from thereon. Only some apps which need to use the inner workings of the OS need to have an "installer". Again, to delete, it just means dragging to the trash (although GX would soon pounce on the few files it leaves behind in the library and such). 

The mac equivalent of the registry (actually is way different from the registry) is the library(to my knowledge). Its just a bunch of folders like 'screensavers', 'plugins' 'workflows' and stuff like that. It is nowhere as complicated and messy as the registry.

There is an option to download the yahoo messenger installation file in full, at least on softpedia.com and such, but the point here is not yahoo messenger, it is the way we install apps on the Mac OS and Windows. 

As for Apple prices, they have crashed considerably, in that the 24inch iMac is available for like 1.06lac from its original 1.24lac. The 17inch on the other hand is at 54k. Macbooks have also come down.


----------



## aryayush (Jun 19, 2007)

Only fifty-four thousand for a 17-inch iMac! That's a steal, dude. Where are these guys in Goa getting their Macs from!! 



			
				sakumar79 said:
			
		

> But, considering that Y! Messenger has much more features in Windows than in Mac, you can expect file sizes to be much different.


The file sizes have nothing to do with the discussion at hand and I did not even mention it. Since I took Yahoo! Messenger as an example to illustrate how easy it is to run applications on a Mac, I just threw in that annoying double download process, which is not there in the Mac version. No big deal. 
And I don't give a **** about the file sizes. Some applications have larger installers on Windows and others are larger on a Mac. The Mac versions are generally larger because you download the whole application instead of a compressed executable (though DMGs use compression too). But who cares! I don't.



			
				sakumar79 said:
			
		

> Having said that, it sounds much cooler to download the installation file and directly start working with the program. Is that the same for all applications or specific to a handful? I ask because some apps in windows also can be run without installation...


Roughly, the number of applications on Windows that work without installation is about the same as the number of applications on Mac OS X that _require_ installation. In other words, _very few_ applications on Mac OS X require installation. As an example, out of the sixty-three third party applications I have, only four of them required installation. Throw in six more for some of the hacks, plug-ins and stuff I've installed over the past nine months. I'm sure I haven't seen that installer more than ten times. In short, it is very rare. 



			
				sakumar79 said:
			
		

> Also, is there anything like a equivalent to registry in Mac? Any comments on whether it will be useful or not?


You have the Library folder and the Terminal. No messy Registry stuff. 
Having said that, I can tell you straight up that Mac OS X is nowhere near as customisable as Windows is and it will never be because the day you open an operating system to users for absolute customisation, they end up crashing their system and blaming the company for it. It is a fact. I prefer not to have it customisable because it is a remarkable operating system even in the default state but I know your opinion will differ, so let us just agree to disagree over this point. 



			
				sakumar79 said:
			
		

> If I want to try things out, should I go for reseller store (not sure if they will let me try things out for a long time) or apple authorised service provider or what (options provided on *www.asia.apple.com/buy/locator/ on the second page)


Any 'Apple Authorised Reseller' or 'Apple Premium Reseller' will allow you to use the Macs as long as you want to. And just to be sure, you tell them that you are interested in buying one and then give them the wrong phone number.


----------



## gxsaurav (Jun 19, 2007)

goobimama said:
			
		

> Most mac applications, just need to be dragged to the applications folder (or wherever else you might want to keep apps) and are working from thereon. Only some apps which need to use the inner workings of the OS need to have an "installer". Again, to delete, it just means dragging to the trash (although GX would soon pounce on the few files it leaves behind in the library and such).



Those name.app like applications are nothing but folders in which everything is stored. Those who are using both Mac & Windows can simply copy any app to Windows partition & then look at it using Windows Explorer. You will it as a folder with name.app type naming structure.

There is one drwaback of this, huge file size. Now with leopard app developers will have to make several state of there app

32bit PowerPC (PowerPC G4)
64bit PowerPC (powerPC G5)
32bit Intel (Core duo)
64bit Intel (Core 2 duo)

Since apps are just folders, the binaries are very fat. Although once installed the user can simply use tools like XSlimmer to reduce the file size but then again, he has to download the big file anyway. DMG isn't the best compression out there. Even ACE is better & 7Z is superb.



> The mac equivalent of the registry (actually is way different from the registry) is the library(to my knowledge). Its just a bunch of folders like 'screensavers', 'plugins' 'workflows' and stuff like that. It is nowhere as complicated and messy as the registry.



Mac has no registry. *Registry is a shared database that any application can use, even with multiple applications using same keys together. Registry is in machine language so it is very fast to directly access the hardware when required.

*On Windows, depending on the developer you can use apps in many states. Most of the apps following Windows Vista app structure, do not need to access the registry much now. Well, registry is faster indeed but then again, for example Winamp can run without even installing. Just extract & run. It all depends on developer whether they want to access the registry or not. Windows gives both ways, registry & non registry, Mac only gives one way. Thats why there are so many Mac applications which need an installer & leave much of the clutter behind.

The Windows equivalent of Library folder in Mac is c:\users\All users\Roaming\



> As for Apple prices, they have crashed considerably, in that the 24inch iMac is available for like 1.06lac from its original 1.24lac. The 17inch on the other hand is at 54k. Macbooks have also come down.



Now release a Macbook with GeForce 8400 GT Go with 256 MB RAM


----------



## sakumar79 (Jun 19, 2007)

@goobimama, I wasnt trying to debate Y!M on mac and windows feature-wise. I also did mention that it was cool that mac software can be run without installation...

Do apps in mac generally come as single files, or are they a folder of files (you know how windows has dlls, ini files, etc along with the exe)? If latter, do you drag just the app or the folder containing app when you want to uninstall?

Is the trail left behind by mac really bothersome? I know Linux uses settings stored in each persons folder as subfolders (like .dia etc). Is it similar with Mac? I know Windows uninstallers sometimes leave similar settings folders (some give option to retain or delete, some just leave them, etc)... Very rarely, I go and clean them these days (possibly because I rarely download and try new software)...

How does the mac keep track of trial versions expiration? If the library is a set of folders, etc, will it not be easy to find and modify expiration info, etc.? 

EDIT: Just noticed the last couple of posts made in the past few minutes... @aryayush, be careful before making statements like "Roughly, the number of applications on Windows that work without installation is about the same as the number of applications on Mac OS X that require installation"... It will blow up in your face when gx and imav read them... There are a large number of Windows apps that can be run without installation... Many of them are small-scale and dont do much, but they are there... The statement might have better if you had worded them as percentage of applications instead of number of applications...

Arun


----------



## aryayush (Jun 19, 2007)

gx_saurav said:
			
		

> Now release a Macbook with GeForce 8400 GT Go with 256 MB RAM


Yeah, goobimama, do what he ordered you to.



			
				gx_saurav said:
			
		

> there are so many Mac applications which need an installer


Oh really? Never came across these "many Mac applications". Care to list twenty five decent Mac applications that require an installer?

I can list hundreds at once which _do not_ require an installer. One of out every fifty applications requires an installer and I say that at the risk of being very lenient.


----------



## sakumar79 (Jun 19, 2007)

I forgot one more thing... I have just downloaded UltraExplorer, a freeware Explorer-replacement software that is supposed to provide column view functionality similar to Mac... I request aryayush, goobimama, etc to comment on the similarities and dissimilarities this software has to the column view provided in Finder... If they are reasonably similar, it will help me get a feel for the column view mode of the Mac.

And arya, the post before yours above is mine that was entered just a minute before yours... Just a heads up so that you dont miss it. Please give your comments for that post too...
Arun

EDIT: The link to UltraExplorer is *www.mustangpeak.net/ultraexplorer.html - missed giving that info.


----------



## aryayush (Jun 19, 2007)

sakumar79 said:
			
		

> Do apps in mac generally come as single files, or are they a folder of files (you know how windows has dlls, ini files, etc along with the exe)? If latter, do you drag just the app or the folder containing app when you want to uninstall?


They come as single files. Let me show you a couple of examples:
*img510.imageshack.us/img510/6062/skypebz3.png *img116.imageshack.us/img116/6356/trampolinemw8.png

See? You understand how simple it is now, don't you? 
I don't think anything simpler is possible.
BTW, I can also give you a very good example of the utility of spring loaded folders here. I have a folder for 'Third party applications' inside my Applications folder. All I have to do is drag that Skype icon to the alias of the Applications folder, it will spring open and drop my application into the subfolder. The really neat thing is that the new window that opened will also automatically close once the copying is done. This is what we appreciate, the fluidity of Mac OS X and this is what is really difficult to explain to someone. 



			
				sakumar79 said:
			
		

> Is the trail left behind by mac really bothersome?


Depends. If you are the neat freak, purist kind of person who does not want even extra files that are 5KB in size lying around, it might be bothersome for you. Personally, I don't give a damn. It has never happened that I've had some problem due to the (according to my assumption) hundreds of files left over from the many applications I've installed and then deleted. It would have been better though if Applications, on being deleted, automatically took away all the related files with them. Or at least, if Mac OS X had an uninstaller. But, I repeat, it is not a problem even now (unless you happen to be gx_saurav, in which case, everything Apple is a problem for you ).



			
				sakumar79 said:
			
		

> How does the mac keep track of trial versions expiration? If the library is a set of folders, etc, will it not be easy to find and modify expiration info, etc.?


I've no idea what you are talking about. Could you be a bit more clear so that dumb people like me can understand better? 

And BTW, a word of congratulations to sakumar79 for being a good listener and actively trying to learn something new. Even if you still prefer the former, it is still a great gift you have that you are capable of having a friendly discussion while disagreeing. I try to imbibe this quality myself, but I am having some trouble. 
_(Don't pay any attention, it is just random rambling!)_



			
				sakumar79 said:
			
		

> I forgot one more thing... I have just downloaded UltraExplorer, a freeware Explorer-replacement software that is supposed to provide column view functionality similar to Mac... I request aryayush, goobimama, etc to comment on the similarities and dissimilarities this software has to the column view provided in Finder... If they are reasonably similar, it will help me get a feel for the column view mode of the Mac.
> 
> And arya, the post before yours above is mine that was entered just a minute before yours... Just a heads up so that you dont miss it. Please give your comments for that post too...
> Arun
> ...


From what I've seen in the screenshots and understood from the description, it is nowhere near.

However, the drop stack thing is a really good feature that even the Finder is missing, and will continue to in Leopard too.


----------



## gxsaurav (Jun 19, 2007)

sakumar79 said:
			
		

> Do apps in mac generally come as single files, or are they a folder of files (you know how windows has dlls, ini files, etc along with the exe)? If latter, do you drag just the app or the folder containing app when you want to uninstall?



Mac apps come as name.app format. They are basically folders with such naming structure so that Mac OS treats them as an application. The eequivalent of dll files etc are inside this app folder only. This means you will end up with 25 version of msvcp.dll inside 25 apps you have. (Example)

You simply drag & drop the app to the trash folder to remove them. This does leaves out clutter in Library folder which has to be removed manually.

Most of the apps which comes with installer do not come with an uninstaller & Mac OS X comes without a unified uninstaller. This has already been discussed in one of the other threads started by arya (in which he got pwned) regarding Windows Vista & Mac OS X.



> Is the trail left behind by mac really bothersome?



Depends, if the settings curropt then even if you reinstall the app, it won't help. You will have to dig through the library folder & manually delete each & every file there, before you can run the application again. This happened with me when I was using iPhoto on Mac.



> How does the mac keep track of trial versions expiration? If the library is a set of folders, etc, will it not be easy to find and modify expiration info, etc.?



The expiration info is inside the name.app. Library just holds a key. When an applications starts, which is trialware it will check in library folder whether there is a key stored there for all users. if there is then it starts as full version, else it starts as trial version.



> Oh really? Never came across these "many Mac applications". Care to list twenty five decent Mac applications that require an installer?



Plz note & define "Decent Apps"

Adobe Lightroom 
Photoshop CS3
Adobe Flash Player
Yahoo Messenger for Mac
Microsoft Messenger
Windows Media Codecs
DivX codec
Xvid Codec
Matroska Codec
AC3 Codec
MPEG2 component for Quicktime
iPhoto
Microsoft Keyboard & Mouse drivers (Require restart)
OnyX
Spring Cleaning
StuffIt 11
NTFS Tools
MacFuse .4
NTFS-3G
Shape Shifter
UNO 1.51
Yahoo Widgets
Path Finder

OMG, Just 23 out of 32 apps I have installed require an installer


----------



## aryayush (Jun 20, 2007)

gx_saurav said:
			
		

> Depends, if the settings curropt then even if you reinstall the app, it won't help. You will have to dig through the library folder & manually delete each & every file there, before you can run the application again. This happened with me when I was using iPhoto on Mac.


@sakumar79
You've heard the lie, now it is time for the truth. Do you know what he did? He installed iPhoto, an application that comes with iLife and is there by default on all Macs but since he is using it illegally, he did not get it by default. Now, iPhoto is a fairly complex application that integrates with Mac OS X at the very core; a lot of applications on Mac OS X work in tandem with iPhoto. So obviously, it came with an installer that installed all the required files at the appropriate places. Now, this guy (with an IQ level of zero) did not like the application and just dragged it to the trash expecting that every other file the application installed would magically take care of themselves.
Now tell me, how much intelligence does it require to know that if an application uses an installer for installation, it must be uninstalled the same way? And then he comes along blaming the poor operating system for it.

So this is your list:
Adobe Lightroom - Check.
Photoshop CS3 - Part of a suite which requires installation.
Adobe Flash Player - Part of a suite which requires installation.
Yahoo Messenger for Mac - *Does not require installation.*
Microsoft Messenger - I don't know about this. Mac users tend to stay away from crap.
Windows Media Codecs - *
DivX codec - *
Xvid Codec - *
Matroska Codec - *
AC3 Codec - *
MPEG2 component for Quicktime - *
iPhoto - No actual Mac user needs to install this.
Microsoft Keyboard & Mouse drivers (Require restart) - WOW, I'm surprised! 
OnyX - Check.
Spring Cleaning - Dunno about this one.
StuffIt 11 - *Does not require installation.*
NTFS Tools - *
MacFuse .4 - *
NTFS-3G - *
Shape Shifter - Check.
UNO 1.51 - Check.
Yahoo Widgets - Dunno about this one.
Path Finder - *Does not require installation.*

* Of course, you will consistently show your sixth-grade intelligence. Codecs and hacks that allow the OS to read NTFS partitions do NOT come under the category of "applications".

From his list, it is clear that there only five actual applications that require installation - Adobe Lightroom, Adobe Creative Suite 3, Onyx, ShapeShifter and UNO. Adobe's applications will always require installation, Onyx is a system maintenance and customisation application that changes a lot of the root level stuff, ShapeShifter and UNO change the theme of the whole operating system. Throw in those applications I am not sure about too (though I seriously doubt his integrity).

Just look at your list - full of codecs and that too installed individually. Ever heard of Perian?
Microsoft Messenger - Biggest pile of crap I've ever seen (on Mac OS X).
iPhoto - WOW! Just great. Awesome!
Microsoft keyboard and mouse drivers - How can you put the blame of Microsoft's inadequate software (and hardware) skills on Apple's head!
MacFUSE and associated NTFS stuff - Since you forgot to mention it, let me also inform everyone that these things also require a couple of restarts. After all, they are friggin' huge core modifications that allow the OS to write to NTFS drives. Why am I not surprised!

Great list you have there. Come up with something more substantial the next time round.


----------



## gxsaurav (Jun 20, 2007)

aryayush said:
			
		

> @sakumar79
> You've heard the lie, now it is time for the truth. Do you know what he did?


You also forgot to mention that* when I tried to re-run the installer, it installed fine but refused to run.*



> iPhoto - No actual Mac user needs to install this.


Tell this to those who are running Panther on there Mac & are buying iLife 06



> * Of course, you will consistently show your sixth-grade intelligence. Codecs and hacks that allow the OS to read NTFS partitions do NOT come under the category of "applications".


Lolz....those are installers boy, obviously you will come to defend it. Ok, let me tell you one thing.

In Windows when we install a codec, there is a usually an installer, & an entry in Programs for uninstallations. Now tell me how do I uninstall a codec in Mac?



> From his list, it is clear that there only five actual applications that require installation - Adobe Lightroom, Adobe Creative Suite 3, Onyx, ShapeShifter and UNO.


There are many but just like always when u r pwned, you will deviate the thread now. iMav will also post his list soon


----------



## goobimama (Jun 20, 2007)

FYI, all those codecs don't need to be installed. For what I'm using, they are just .Component files which have to be dropped into the library > Quicktime folder (Not very sure about the path though).


----------



## aryayush (Jun 20, 2007)

Exactly. In fact, there are only three codecs that need to be installed - DivX, Windows Media and Perian (which is like K-Lite Mega Codec Pack, a one-stop solution).


----------



## gxsaurav (Jun 20, 2007)

Mind telling me how do I play Real Media Files in Quicktime without installing full Real player, if Perian is a K-Lite codec pack equivalent


----------



## goobimama (Jun 20, 2007)

Still need some better support for Matroska though. x264 (which in turn means HD) sucks on OS X... The only real option is VLC, which has some crappy output.


----------



## aryayush (Jun 20, 2007)

Why? After installing Perian, I use QuickTime Player more often to play my HD movies (_Planet Earth_, for example). It works just fine.


----------



## goobimama (Jun 20, 2007)

Still doesn't play 1080p even though the Core Duo is fast enough... Not that 1080p is anything great for anything below 40 inches. Still, it would be nice to be able to play that stuff.


----------



## aryayush (Jun 20, 2007)

As if you have a lot of 1080p content.


----------



## sakumar79 (Jun 20, 2007)

@gx, settings becoming corrupt happens in Windows too (happened a couple of times for me in Opera)... For that I go to App Data\Opera and delete the folder and reinstall... In Mac, are the setting files for each app in separate folders (one for Opera, one for OpenOffice, etc), or are they all in one big folder... If they are in the same folder, it could be a bit cumbersome for the occasional case this might happen...

@aryayush, Regarding trial software, my clarification was like this... In Windows (I think this is how it is), each app is assigned an ID, a really long confusing string of hexadecimels, in the registry and through this ID it stores certain information that should not be available to the regular user. This way, the user wont be able to easily circumvent trial software expiration settings, etc... If this info is stored in file format, even if encrypted, I feel it may be easier to hack and circumvent... gx has given some details but I would rather they come from you or goobimama, etc

Regarding UltraExplorer, I just want you to check out the column view functionality of it and compare it with Finder... What features are missing, etc... If possible, I request you or goobimama to install and try it out in a Windows system/partition and inform me... I would greatly appreciate your feedback... Actually, in my Dad's office, all the staff have some guidelines to make backups... The projects are numbered from 1001 onwards and the main group folders are like Upto2000, Upto2500, Upto2700, etc and then, there are subfolders inside for each project (named 2001, 2002, etc). Inside this, they backup completed drawings. Sometimes, they put the files in the wrong folders, and sometimes they put the project folder inside the wrong group folder. So, recently, I started re-ordering the files in correct folders... But with Explorer, it involves two windows and going back and forth... On a small scale this is actually faster, but on a large scale, it is being a bit cumbersome... So, I am going to see how column view can make it easier...

Also, aryayush, just curious... You mentioned in a few posts above "if an application uses an installer for installation, it must be uninstalled the same way" regarding gx's experience with iPhoto... Does that mean there is an uninstaller included (for example, if an upgrade was available separately for iLife)? If not, what would have been the correct way to uninstall such a software...

Arun


----------



## gxsaurav (Jun 20, 2007)

sakumar79 said:
			
		

> @gx, settings becoming corrupt happens in Windows too (happened a couple of times for me in Opera)... For that I go to App Data\Opera and delete the folder and reinstall... In Mac, are the setting files for each app in separate folders (one for Opera, one for OpenOffice, etc), or are they all in one big folder... If they are in the same folder, it could be a bit cumbersome for the occasional case this might happen...


In Vista, everything user setting is in C:\Users\Appdata\Local folder. under seperate folders like Opera for only opera releated things & firefox for only firefox settings. Just delete this folder & settings will be automaticly set to default. 

In Mac, settings files are inside Library folder on Mac HD, & not at one place or unified. I recommend you to read the other thread why Mac OS X is inferior to windows when it comes to application uninstallation.

On Vista, we have native Windows Installer 3.1, in that thread I again mentioned why it is so good on Windows enviroment & how it makes it easy to upgrade software without even closing them.



> If this info is stored in file format, even if encrypted, I feel it may be easier to hack and circumvent... gx has given some details but I would rather they come from you or goobimama, etc


Applications in Mac *.app are self contained. They have there own libraries bundled & also the contain any file they require inside them including the trial information. This can be tempered with as many cracked apps I am using for Mac were changed using this method.



> Also, aryayush, just curious... You mentioned in a few posts above "if an application uses an installer for installation, it must be uninstalled the same way" regarding gx's experience with iPhoto... Does that mean there is an uninstaller included (for example, if an upgrade was available separately for iLife)? If not, what would have been the correct way to uninstall such a software...


He only knows about Mac OS from Mac OS X 10.4 Tiger days, actually any macboy here knows it from tiger days only . Statement like "No Mac user needs to install iLife" is stupid. Arya like I said, go tell this to someone who is running Mac OS X 10.3 Panther.

If there is no uninstaller then you will need to use 3rd party application like AppZapper or Spring cleaning which I use here. They will check & remove almost all the files.


----------



## iMav (Jun 20, 2007)

1 more frakin foolish thing in os x finder is that suppose u wanna open a certain file through a compatible program ... 

u start the program:

os x:

u browse for the file, while browsing finder will show u all the files & folders that are there in the folder u are whether they are compatible with the program or no it will show u

windows:

when u r browsing it gives u the option of choosing which files u wanna see ... if u r browsing thru paint or ps ... u get a drop down which allows u to choose whether all files/pngs/gifs watever ... but jobs felt it wud be better to show u all files ...

and as far as applications are concerned ... drag n drop it will still copy the files needed coz it will install the application to 1 directory only tht is where ur os is... and windows is much better it allows u to choose which directory u want the application to be installed ... so the drag-n-drop actually reduces the capability of an installer ... 

ps: i know this will have the mac genius arya again pwned so he wont reply  ... he hasnt replied to the posts whr iv pwned him before and this is no different 

heres something more ... trash .... well windows' recycle bin is much better it allows u to choose from within it the files u wanna permanently delete ... unlike in trash there is no such option ... if its emptying trash it empties the whole thing ... again i would prefer an option ... which again only windows' provides

heres something more ... the great search tool embedd in every window ... theres no way of stopping a search mid way .... even if what u want has been found it will still keep on searching the whole folder


----------



## gxsaurav (Jun 20, 2007)

iMav said:
			
		

> u browse for the file, while browsing finder will show u all the files & folders that are there in the folder u are whether they are compatible with the program or no it will show u
> 
> windows:
> 
> when u r browsing it gives u the option of choosing which files u wanna see ... if u r browsing thru paint or ps ... u get a drop down which allows u to choose whether all files/pngs/gifs watever ... but jobs felt it wud be better to show u all files ...



 thats the mac way...lolz. Now I really wonder how is this convenience



> heres something more ... trash .... well windows' recycle bin is much better it allows u to choose from within it the files u wanna permanently delete ... unlike in trash there is no such option ... if its emptying trash it empties the whole thing ... again i would prefer an option ... which again only windows' provides



In Windows, right clicking & empty trash cleans it completely.



> heres something more ... the great search tool embedd in every window ... theres no way of stopping a search mid way .... even if what u want has been found it will still keep on searching the whole folder



Let me check, in Windows either clicking on the stop button or pressing the escape keys stops the search. Escape should work in Mac too


----------



## iMav (Jun 20, 2007)

but why no stop button ... and for the trash thing i like having the option of permanntly deleting some files not all which windows allows me to ... 

ps: hey mac genius what happened no reply pwned eh!


----------



## gxsaurav (Jun 20, 2007)

You can still open the trash, select the files u want to delete & press command + backspace to delete those files from trash.

Now, I do wonder how Mac OS X is more convenient when using 2 keys to delete a file when in Windows we just press the Delete key on keyboard.


----------



## iMav (Jun 20, 2007)

ah i see i just selected the files i wanted to deleted and though i had a hunch tht clicking empty trash would delete them too i went ahead


----------



## gxsaurav (Jun 21, 2007)

> os x:
> 
> u browse for the file, while browsing finder will show u all the files & folders that are there in the folder u are whether they are compatible with the program or no it will show u
> 
> ...



I just checked, both Windows & Mac methods are good enough

1) OS X - It will show u all files, but u will be able to select only those files which the application opens

2) Windows - It gives u an option toshow only those files which u need.

Idiot user

1) Mac - Why can't I select my other files?  

2) Windows - OMG...Holy **** where did my files go


----------



## iMav (Jun 21, 2007)

the problem with showing files is that if ur file is way below u will have to scroll all the way but in windows it only shows the folders and the selected file type ... which makes finding the file quicker now some mac boy will come and say use the search feature which actually dumb ... but then again once pwned thoroughly they dont come back


----------



## goobimama (Jun 21, 2007)

I've never really scrolled and all that stuff in those dialog boxes. Always use Spotlight...


----------



## iMav (Jun 21, 2007)

use what pleases but the point is what it is not a work around


----------



## goobimama (Jun 21, 2007)

Well if you look at it, as GX said, an idiot in Windows would be like "Where did all my files go?" (I know one, my brother). There are some who like it the way it is, what they are familiar with. Someone uses Explorer to organise files and when using the dialog box, finds all things a wee bit different (convenient, but different).

While with OS X, you get to see all your files, exactly the way they are, with a prominent "Recommended files" or All Files at the top. It is pretty easy to make out whether the files can be opened or not...

EVEN IF THIS IS A MAJOR FLAW IN OS X, which it is not, it doesn't suddenly make Windoze better than OS X


----------



## iMav (Jun 21, 2007)

it makes windows better coz windows gives u options ... all files, particular files ... os x doesnt ...


----------



## gxsaurav (Jun 21, 2007)

iMav said:
			
		

> it makes windows better coz windows gives u options ... all files, particular files ... os x doesnt ...



Yup, *Windows lets us work the way we wan't Mac OS X makes us work the way El Jobos wants*


----------



## iMav (Jun 21, 2007)

^^ exactly and he is done it with the ipod too ...

he is like one of those evil hollywood vilians out to take over the world ...

1. all macs look alike (couldnt be themed if it wasnt for 3rd party good people)
2. ipod again all ipods look the same (ui)
3. iphone also is controlled by el jobso whom u call, what u install every bloody thing ...

moral of the story make every 1 buy the same looking thing which they have no control over and they have to turn to u for help and u have control on them ... just like he controls what every mac user upgrades on his mac or what 1 will install on their iphones ...


----------



## gxsaurav (Jun 21, 2007)

^^^^ hey, that still works for those Americans who don't want to know anything about computers (trust me, you should see those Mac or Windows support calls) or who are usually idiots in computing & don't even know where the start button is.

Some of the sensible users are also following the cult. CAN'T HELP IT.


----------



## goobimama (Jun 21, 2007)

Think Different!


----------



## Avatar (Jun 21, 2007)

goobimama said:
			
		

> Think Different!


 
But do what Mr. Jobs wants you to. 

Cult people don't think , they just follow.


----------



## gxsaurav (Jun 21, 2007)

Ya, think a lot before going for Mac

1) You will be locked to the Mac

2) You cannot upgrade anything. Let me know if you can upgrade that X1600 in your iMac with a Geforce 8600 GT with HDCP  & the DVD drive with a HD DVD drive. Guess what, I can do that in my 4 years old PC right now.

3) No matter how much you polish a white box, its still a white box.


----------



## iMav (Jun 21, 2007)

whr is that mac boy was jumping saying that the os is flawless we have come up so many of em ... and he has decided to pack his bag and leave ... thts the problem with fan boys they blindly follow something will not weigh the options properly their thinking is mere paas hai toh acha hai ... main bhale bewakuf hoon par maine kharida aur mehenga hai toh its the best


----------



## gxsaurav (Jun 22, 2007)

iMav said:
			
		

> whr is that mac boy was jumping saying that the os is flawless we have come up so many of em ... and he has decided to pack his bag and leave ... thts the problem with fan boys they blindly follow something will not weigh the options properly their thinking is mere paas hai toh acha hai ... main bhale bewakuf hoon par maine kharida aur mehenga hai toh its the best



He thought that he can say Mac OS X flawless & every one will believe it cos no one has the money to buy new Mac to run Mac OS X. So, his claims will be considered correct. Even the geenie effects is slow like hell in Mac.

He must be looking all over the net to copy paste some more articles praising Mac OS X.

Agar dimag hota to Dell Inspiron main Hackintoish use karta woh , right now he is getting free money thats why he is jumping like this. Tell him to earn some money on his own & then consider getting a Mac & he will run away.


----------



## goobimama (Jun 22, 2007)

Well for what its worth, the "Oh it took us 18 months to compose" startup sound of Vista is much better than the Mac's "Bhaaaaang!"... its really scary when you have plugged in Logitech Z5500 speakers and forgotten to lower the volume which was at 50%!

Hey what's this about the Genie effect being slow on the Mac? If you use those Hackintosh things, then one can't blame the OS. Its really fast on my system...

And I didn't allow my parents to pay for my iMac. Even for the AppleCare warranty...


----------



## Avatar (Jun 22, 2007)

gx_saurav said:
			
		

> So, his claims will be considered correct. Even the geenie effects is slow like hell in Mac.


 
I cant say about how slow the Genie effect is , but it sure is ugly. 



			
				gx_saurav said:
			
		

> right now he is getting free money thats why he is jumping like this. Tell him to earn some money on his own & then consider getting a Mac & he will run away.


 
Even if you are right to some extent , i don't think its ok to comment upon how some one gets his computer. I dont know who are you mentioning here, but if he is a kid then its very obvious that he can not get things with his own money until he starts earning. 

But yeah i won't buy a mac with my hard earned money for sure.


----------



## teknoPhobia (Jun 22, 2007)

I love this thread


----------



## gxsaurav (Jun 22, 2007)

goobimama said:
			
		

> Hey what's this about the Genie effect being slow on the Mac? If you use those Hackintosh things, then one can't blame the OS. Its really fast on my system...



Oh...ok. Yup, even Core Image is not compatible :-"



> And I didn't allow my parents to pay for my iMac. Even for the AppleCare warranty...



It wasen't for you, it was for the self proclaimed "Mac Genius"



> Even if you are right to some extent , i don't think its ok to comment upon how some one gets his computer. I dont know who are you mentioning here, but if he is a kid then its very obvious that he can not get things with his own money until he starts earning



He is not a kid, he just became adult  (now roaming around the A Grade movie halls of his city, lolz). Yup, he got his computer from somewhere else, but the way he is acting its like "I made a good decision". Hack, you got money for what u wanted whether it was good or not.



			
				Macboys said:
			
		

> thinking is mere paas hai toh acha hai ... main bhale bewakuf hoon par maine kharida aur mehenga hai toh its the best


----------



## goobimama (Jun 22, 2007)

I know that comment was not directed at me, cause of the 'genius' status awarded to...well. But what I wanted to say was that for all these years, my dad funded my computer purchases. And I didn't get to spend a lot at that. But when I wanted to get my own computer, I wanted something that will give me some good reliability, and good service, which I would get only from the Mac (at least in Goa, there's no other choice in this matter).

I'm not really sure where this is leading. I didn't sleep at all last night...mind's not in the right place I think.

Ah, figured it out. 

Though I don't really know how he bought the laptop, what I can say is, who at that age has any cash of his own? I certainly didn't have any money of mine at the time. I'm sure when things settle down, he'll make the 'same' right decision...


----------



## gxsaurav (Jun 22, 2007)

Braking news : My Mac OS X installation is borked . Need to either reinstall or repair some how using MacDrive from within Windows.

Oh & for those who have never seen, this is how the kernel panic on Mac OS X looks like.

*img366.imageshack.us/img366/4228/kernelpanichz4.th.jpg

@ Goobi

My first PC was a P3 1GHz which my parents bought me, I never used to brag about it.

My current PC I bought myself, using the part time money I earned while designing, after selling my old P3 PC 2nd hand. And hell yeah I used to brag about it & my GFX card.....khud ki kamayi thi


----------



## iMav (Jun 22, 2007)

what the hel u do to the flawless best os in the world

ps: the restart thing ... bugged me when i had my gfx card problem when i installed os x the first time


----------



## gxsaurav (Jun 22, 2007)

I updated it  & it borked. Check your PM iMav & help me


----------



## iMav (Jun 22, 2007)

from 4.8 to 4.9?

well i was browsing through some sites and every 1 said if theres no porblem with 4.8 dont update to 4.9 coz then u will have problems


----------



## gxsaurav (Jun 22, 2007)

nah, I updated to 10.4.10, check your PM & Mail me


----------



## goobimama (Jun 22, 2007)

First of all, you cannot complain about the OS not working when you aren't even using Apple Hardware... I have never got a kernel panic till now, though I've read about it...

However, when there's a "real big problem" such as a disk crash, during bootup, the Apple logo in the white background flashes a "Finder icon"....it happened when my iBook HDD crapped out...


----------



## gxsaurav (Jun 22, 2007)

^^^ hey, nobody is blaiming Apple here. Chill...I bash Apple when they deserve it, Right now I am bashing my luck.


----------



## freshseasons (Jun 22, 2007)

gx_saurav said:
			
		

> My current PC I bought myself, using the part time money I earned while designing, And hell yeah I used to brag about it & my GFX card.....khud ki kamayi thi


   Sorry totally off topic here. I have certain US as well as genuine Indian clients ( Both are personally connected ..so no Business there  from my angle)( and i am not flooding spam either.)I genuinely need a good designer who can work part time on assignment basis.Yes the payments are good.Let me know..


----------



## iMav (Jun 22, 2007)

^^ use pm system ...


----------



## gxsaurav (Jun 22, 2007)

@ iMav

 didn't work. Have to reinstall.


----------



## iMav (Jun 22, 2007)

another flaw ... replacing dll works in windows


----------



## gxsaurav (Jun 22, 2007)

^^^ lolz...yeah, replacing dll revart anything back in Windows.  But we can't blame Apple here, it is in't Macintosh, its hackintosh.

I m waiting for zeeshan to mail me the files.


----------



## aryayush (Jun 23, 2007)

I've been sick for the past few days - so much, in fact, that I had to return to Siliguri for a few days (a few days of parental affection is always recommended by the doctor ) and that is why I haven't been active around these parts. It's nice to see that gx_saurav has been particularly loquacious lately about how I supposedly do not deserve a Macintosh just because I bought it off my father's money. Keep the jealousy aside for a bit, buddy. My father has always insisted that I should buy absolutely the best product available in any category. If he cannot afford it, he won't allow me to buy something inferior instead - I just cannot have the product. At the age of eighteen, when I'm fresh out of school, I don't know any honest method of making 1.5 lac bucks and I am sure that when you were my age, you did not have a lot of self-earned money either (apart from the pick-pocketing).

As for not buying Macs when I start earning myself, let me assure you this (as goobimama has already said) that every computer I buy in the future will be a Mac, unless Apple's standard falls afters Jobs' reign comes to an end. Not only that, I am almost sure that if I buy a product from a category that Apple competes in, I'll always opt for Apple's product (the iPhone is a shining example). And I am very sure that your dear friend goobimama will do the same.

I've no idea what I just typed and I beg everyone's pardon (except gx_saurav's) if I am posting something offensive. I have a headache right now and I am not thinking clearly. The spiteful (not to mention, jealous) posts from gx_saurav infuriated me and I felt the need to post. It is the damn headache. Bye!


----------



## iMav (Jun 23, 2007)

What!!!! the flaws posted made u ill  

the best remedy for u is go get urself a normal pc with vista 

how posting about the new flaws found  ... or rather dont ... reading new flaws would increase ur headache


----------



## gxsaurav (Jun 23, 2007)

aryayush said:
			
		

> I've been sick for the past few days - so much, in fact, that I had to return to Siliguri for a few days (a few days of parental affection is always recommended by the doctor ) and that is why I haven't been active around these parts. It's nice to see that gx_saurav has been particularly loquacious lately about how I supposedly do not deserve a Macintosh just because I bought it off my father's money. Keep the jealousy aside for a bit, buddy. My father has always insisted that I should buy absolutely the best product available in any category. If he cannot afford it, he won't allow me to buy something inferior instead - I just cannot have the product. At the age of eighteen, when I'm fresh out of school, I don't know any honest method of making 1.5 lac bucks and I am sure that when you were my age, you did not have a lot of self-earned money either (apart from the pick-pocketing).



Not much, by the time I was 18...I had My own cycle bought from my own money + my Own current P4 computer

By the time i was 20 I paid 40k for my Unicorn...out of 56k. Rest dad paid.

hmm....not braging...its just that I know the value of my hard earned money.


----------



## aryayush (Jun 23, 2007)

Good for you. Keep it up.

Maybe I'll take some tuitions from you some day.


----------



## goobimama (Jun 23, 2007)

> By the time i was 20 I paid 40k for my Unicorn


For someone who doesn't know that a bike named Unicorn exists, this would be a particularly interesting statement...

Btw, why did you go in for a unicorn when a CD100 would have done? That's what you normally do in the "computing" world eh!


----------



## nepcker (Jun 23, 2007)

*I can make a list of the flaws of the Finder here:*
1 ) Finder has no Cut option.
2 ) Finder has no address bar.
3 ) Finder has no breadcrumb bar.
4 ) Finder has no option to show just a particular file type in Viewport.
5 ) Finder has no custom icon spacing.
6 ) You cannot resize any windows from any side. Just the south west
7 ) It does not show full file path, so yo have to manually switch view in finder and then go all the way to the root to see where the file is present.
8 )Unability to hide particular filetypes.
9) Does not show live previews of windows when using Command + Tab.
10) Does not allow you to revert to previous versions of files.
11) Has no selection checkboxes for difficult selection.
12) The maximum icon size in Tiger running on a 20" display with resolution of 1600X1200 is 128X128. The maximum size of Vista Icons on a 20" or 24" display with resolution of 1600X1200 or beyond that is 256X256 with font size up to 72 pixel.
13) In Windwos Explorer, I can simply right click on an image & select "Set as desktop background". Done. In Finder there is no such way. You have to either go to control panel & from there change or right click on the desktop & select "Change desktop background". Then give the folder path & select the image to set as wallpaper.
14) Column view goes back one folder at a time, this means you cannot jump 5 folder back directly. However in tree view of Explorer, you can go from anywhere to anywhere using the tree navigation. You don't even need to open the multiple windows.


gx_saurav, you really need to learn something about OS X before you start making comparisons; much of what you post here is simply uninformed.

Given your previous posts, I was tempted to ignore this one, but then I realized that other readers might benefit from reading solutions to your "problems" with the Finder.


*Things from your list in which the Finder differs from Explorer based on philosophical differences in interface design (i.e., not "better" vs. "worse"):*
_1) Finder has no Cut option.
5) Finder has no custom icon spacing.
6) You cannot resize any windows from any side. Just the south west
11) Has no selection checkboxes for difficult selection._


*Things from your list that show you simply aren't familiar with OS X:*
_2) Finder has no address bar._
Choose Go -> Go to Folder (or press Shift+Command+G) and then type in the path/address to a file. Quite similar, although in the Finder this little-used feature doesn't clutter up the window; it appears only when you need it.

_3) Finder has no breadcrumb bar._
By adding the Path item to Finder-window toolbars, you get the same functionality: you can see the full path to the current folder and quickly switch to any point in that path. (You can also Command+click on the folder icon in the title bar of any Finder window for similar functionality.)

_4) Finder has no option to show just a particular file type in Viewport._
The Finder's approach to this is to use Smart Folders, which let you filter files, for example, by file type.

_7) It does not show full file path, so yo have to manually switch view in finder and then go all the way to the root to see where the file is present._
See #3, above.

_9) Does not show live previews of windows when using Command + Tab._
That's what Expose is for, and its live previews are much more useful. In this respect, I think OS X is more flexible than Windows, as it gives you a number of options for switching between apps and Windows.

_13) In Windwos Explorer, I can simply right click on an image & select "Set as desktop background". Done. In Finder there is no such way. You have to either go to control panel & from there change or right click on the desktop & select "Change desktop background". Then give the folder path & select the image to set as wallpaper._
Leopard gives you the ability to set any image as the Desktop via right-click. That said, you're making this sound much more difficult than it really is. You can simply drag any image into the Desktop preference pane.

_14) Column view goes back one folder at a time, this means you cannot jump 5 folder back directly. However in tree view of Explorer, you can go from anywhere to anywhere using the tree navigation. You don't even need to open the multiple windows._
You can just move the scroll bar to the left to go back as many levels as you want. Similarly, with the Path item noted above, you can choose the level to which you want to go. If you still like the "tree" approach, there are several utilities out there that let you navigate this way, as well. You're really stretching here.


*Things from your list that actually have some validity:*
_8 ) Unability to hide particular filetypes._
To some extent, sure, although I'm not sure how useful such a feature really is to most users, especially on the Mac. (And the Finder does have several ways to hide files.)

_10) Does not allow you to revert to previous versions of files._
This is actually a backup feature rather than an Explorer/Finder feature; if you're using a good backup app, you can do this on any platform. That said, it's good when it's built into the OS (as will also be the case in OS X come Leopard).

_12) The maximum icon size in Tiger running on a 20" display with resolution of 1600X1200 is 128X128. The maximum size of Vista Icons on a 20" or 24" display with resolution of 1600X1200 or beyond that is 256X256 with font size up to 72 pixel._
You win. We should switch to Windows just so we can have big-ass icons in Explorer  I mean, seriously, if this is one of Explorer's major advantages over the Finder, I think Mac users are okay with that.

(On a serious note, this is an arbitrary limit Apple put in place because they apparently felt larger sizes look cluttered. I just edited the Finder's preference file and now my icons are 512x512 with a font size of 96  )





			
				gx_saurav said:
			
		

> Both Explorer & Finder cater to the need of File management, it's just that Explorer is Kick ass & highly extendable.


 Or it could be that you just don't know much about OS X and instead of learning more about how things are done you post these uninformed "comparisons". People might take you more seriously -- and not dismiss you as a troll -- if you did a bit of homework first.

Hopefully, some people reading along got a few useful tips out of this post...


----------



## Avatar (Jun 23, 2007)

goobimama said:
			
		

> For someone who doesn't know that a bike named Unicorn exists, this would be a particularly interesting statement...


 
Haha, roflol. 
Reminds me of the simpsons episode when Lisa got her Pony , Saurav got his unicorn


----------



## iMav (Jun 23, 2007)

why do mac boys constantly wanna show their naivety 



			
				nep said:
			
		

> Things from your list in which the Finder differs from Explorer based on philosophical differences in interface design (i.e., not "better" vs. "worse"):


how dumb can 1 get  nep what crap are u talking philosophical and all .... dude its not there its not there its a drawback, shortcoming, flaw call it what ever u want to philosophical differences in interface

the option of cut is a theory  when did cutting a file become philosophy .... neps post give me a lot of hope coz he constantly goes on proving with his statements that santa and banta arent the dumbest lot


----------



## gxsaurav (Jun 23, 2007)

goobimama said:
			
		

> For someone who doesn't know that a bike named Unicorn exists, this would be a particularly interesting statement...
> 
> Btw, why did you go in for a unicorn when a CD100 would have done? That's what you normally do in the "computing" world eh!



Nah, gals don't like CD100. Besides, I prefer spending more on real life then computers. Whose gonna buy a 1.5lakh Laptop . Remember "Real Life is better"



			
				nepcker said:
			
		

> _2) Finder has no address bar._
> Choose Go -> Go to Folder (or press Shift+Command+G) and then type in the path/address to a file. Quite similar, although in the Finder this little-used feature doesn't clutter up the window; it appears only when you need it.



Right,  you do that & tell me if it shows where I am right now in Finder. I can't even copy paste the current address somewhere like this.



> _3) Finder has no breadcrumb bar._
> By adding the Path item to Finder-window toolbars, you get the same functionality: you can see the full path to the current folder and quickly switch to any point in that path. (You can also Command+click on the folder icon in the title bar of any Finder window for similar functionality.)



 You call that breadcrumbbar, I call that "Back to folder" Functioning.



> _4) Finder has no option to show just a particular file type in Viewport._
> The Finder's approach to this is to use Smart Folders, which let you filter files, for example, by file type.



Windows Explorer has Smart folders & specific file search.



> _9) Does not show live previews of windows when using Command + Tab._
> That's what Expose is for, and its live previews are much more useful. In this respect, I think OS X is more flexible than Windows, as it gives you a number of options for switching between apps and Windows.



You also think Mac is cheap. ...Well your opinion is subjective



> Leopard gives you the ability to set any image as the Desktop via right-click. That said, you're making this sound much more difficult than it really is. You can simply drag any image into the Desktop preference pane.



Leopard? How can I comment on a product which is not even out. In this case even Windows 7 will have direct install to brain functionality


----------



## aryayush (Jun 23, 2007)

goobimama said:
			
		

> Btw, why did you go in for a unicorn when a CD100 would have done? That's what you normally do in the "computing" world eh!


Spot on. I cannot wait to hear the answer to this one. 



			
				nepcker said:
			
		

> You win. We should switch to Windows just so we can have big-ass icons in Explorer


LOL! Looks like someone got their sense of humour back!  Awesome post. 



			
				gx_saurav said:
			
		

> Nah, gals don't like CD100. Besides, I prefer spending more on real life then computers. Whose gonna buy a 1.5lakh Laptop . Remember "Real Life is better"


Oh, and buying a computer is somehow different from buying a bike? Spending on a computer is not part of this "real life" of yours? LOL!
BTW, girls don't choose guys based on what bikes they ride. And they dig Macs more than they do a Honda Unicorn. 

(I know I may be wrong about this but you have no means of proving your point either.)


----------



## gxsaurav (Jun 23, 2007)

aryayush said:
			
		

> Oh, and buying a computer is somehow different from buying a bike? Spending on a computer is not part of this "real life" of yours? LOL!
> BTW, girls don't choose guys based on what bikes they ride. And they dig Macs more than they do a Honda Unicorn.



Lolz...you such a boy. No really, completely ignorant & nascent in life.

I know gals just don't like boys on the basis of the bike they drive, but if I buy a Rs 1.5 lakh Laptop the first question she will ask "Whats so special in it? why is it worth Rs 1.5lkh, just for white colour?"



> (I know I may be wrong about this but you have no means of proving your point either.)



Yup you are wrong & yup I have means to prove my statement. Just do some history research & you will come to know.


----------



## aryayush (Jun 23, 2007)

WOW! That was some hard evidence. It is so completely proved now. LOL!



			
				gx_saurav said:
			
		

> I know gals just don't like boys on the basis of the bike they drive, but if I buy a Rs 1.5 lakh Laptop the first question she will ask "Whats so special in it? why is it worth Rs 1.5lkh, just for white colour?"


You know, the first comment I hear when people see my notebook for the first time is, _"dekh ke hi mehnga lagta hai!"_ And then, if they are technologically inclined, I proceed to show them Mac OS X, which only serves to wow them more. Of course, most people I know come under the _Homo Sapiens_ category, which might not be true in your case!

What does "nascent in life" mean anyway and where did you pull it out off? It sure smells sour. 


Ha! Ha! This discussion is fun. What is a technology forum without a good, mostly meaningless Mac vs. Windows thread or two!


----------



## goobimama (Jun 23, 2007)

> I know gals just don't like boys on the basis of the bike they drive, but if I buy a Rs 1.5 lakh Laptop the first question she will ask "Whats so special in it? why is it worth Rs 1.5lkh, just for white colour?"



Doesn't make sense to me. If you seriously want a girl to like you on the basis of something that you own, then its a very very poor thought. I haven't mentioned the iMac to even one of my girl friends. Sure when they come over they fuss over it and play around with photo booth and such . Though I think the Small Cat gives it a lot of competition in terms of 'girl attention'. 

I never mention the price though cause they never ask...The small cat though is free...


----------



## iMav (Jun 23, 2007)

aryayush said:
			
		

> WOW! That was some hard evidence. It is so completely proved now. LOL!
> 
> You know, the first comment I hear when people see my notebook for the first time is, _"dekh ke hi mehnga lagta hai!"_ And then, if they are technologically inclined, I proceed to show them Mac OS X, which only serves to wow them more


 those guys who consider technically inclined are only technically inclined not technically knowledgabel


----------



## goobimama (Jun 23, 2007)

Technologically inclined means someone who has some interest in technology. And those who are interested in technology are very very interested in the mac... Technologically *knowledgeable* are those know claim to know everything (I wonder who :Chin scratching smiley


----------



## gxsaurav (Jun 23, 2007)

hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha

arya, u impress girls by showing your computer? ......


----------



## iMav (Jun 23, 2007)

goobimama said:
			
		

> Technologically inclined means someone who has some interest in technology. And those who are interested in technology are very very interested in the mac... Technologically *knowledgeable* are those know claim to know everything (I wonder who :Chin scratching smiley


 there is a difference inclined means having interest not necessarily means having knowledge about it ... but technically knowledgable acc to ur english may mean knowing everything but acc to my english it means some 1 who knows something .... and ewen i say something means a little more than the 1 who only has interest  and u know that ... as of now u too are enjoying this bashing thread and hence are coming with these statements ... ur wish congratulations u just joined the club of  blind mac salesman


----------



## gxsaurav (Jun 23, 2007)

Thread again deviated cos Macboys have nothing valid & proper to say.


----------



## iMav (Jun 23, 2007)

they really dont have anything to say .... they will talk about a person's english and all sorts of non-sense with stupid statements like cut option is philosophical and what not .... in the beginning there was reasoning but upon the dawn of realization that the os x has genuine draw backs which they too did not realize they started deviating topics


----------



## Desi-Tek.com (Jun 23, 2007)

gx_saurav said:
			
		

> Braking news : My Mac OS X installation is borked . Need to either reinstall or repair some how using MacDrive from within Windows.
> 
> Oh & for those who have never seen, this is how the kernel panic on Mac OS X looks like.
> 
> ...


 i guess u tried to update os x from  through update channel? if u r using hackintosh than u should not do this it remove the  non mac kext from the system  which result in such error. 
*thakur.dheeraj.googlepages.com/Picture1.png

and there is no need to reinstall os x again all u need to save those missing kext file back to its directory if u need any help meet me on gmail or macosx channel on freenode


----------



## goobimama (Jun 23, 2007)

iMav said:
			
		

> there is a difference inclined means having interest not necessarily means having knowledge about it ... but technically knowledgable acc to ur english may mean knowing everything but acc to my english it means some 1 who knows something .... and ewen i say something means a little more than the 1 who only has interest  and u know that ... as of now u too are enjoying this bashing thread and hence are coming with these statements ... ur wish congratulations u just joined the club of  blind mac salesman



I hope these threads are not taken so personally as to bring about rifts in relationships. I hope its all cool outside this thread, such that we are all friends. GX, iMav, what say?

But inside this thread, I shall hunt you down like a rabid dog with three legs who runs faster than a leopard. I will take you down like Abhishek takes down those gundas in Dhoom 2, after he jumps out of the water like a bull-frog in his opening scene...

Now if you want to argue who is knowledgeable, you yourself said, someone who knows something. Now, HOW MUCH, is something? Surely the 'technologically inclined' knows something. Surely he/she knows a little more than my neighbour vasudev. The distinction is hardly of any worth. And wait a minute. Whoever said a "technologically inclined" person has no knowledge of computers? I know I said something in about that in my earlier post, but I wasn't thinking properly then... A technologically inclined person is a geek in most respects..

And as for Saurav saying that we are deviating from this thread, oh no my friend, we are not. After all, Socrates, was one who said that any argument needs to have all its terms defined...


----------



## gxsaurav (Jun 23, 2007)

Desi-Tek.com said:
			
		

> i guess u tried to update os x from  through update channel? if u r using hackintosh than u should not do this it remove the  non mac kext from the system  which result in such error.
> *thakur.dheeraj.googlepages.com/Picture1.png
> 
> and there is no need to reinstall os x again all u need to save those missing kext file back to its directory if u need any help meet me on gmail or macosx channel on freenode


aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa where were u yesterday? Somebody was right when he said, you get experience only after u need it the most.


----------



## iMav (Jun 23, 2007)

no goobi a technological inclined person is not a geek in any sense and i already said how much is something ... 

this forum itself has had members who post i have heard vista has compatibility issues is that true ... now thats  a tech inclined person and a knowledgable 1 knows the truth which i can bet even praka, arya every1 knew but still for the sake of a fight they always brought up compatibility issues

PS: im cool man ... even i dont gx will bang u with his bike if he ever sees u in lucknow


----------



## nepcker (Jun 24, 2007)

gx_saurav said:
			
		

> Right, you do that & tell me if it shows where I am right now in Finder. I can't even copy paste the current address somewhere like this.


 There's an optional Paths menu, or you can command-click on the title bar to see the hierarchy and go back through it.

If you want to view a file's path, there are several ways to view the hierarchical path to a particular file. Use any of these:
Set the Finder window view to Columns, and read the path from left to right.
Select the item in the Finder, then Command-click the icon of the enclosing folder that appears in the window's title bar.
Choose Customize Toolbar from the View menu in the Finder, then add the Path button to your toolbar.



> You also think Mac is cheap.


 I have never said the the Mac Pro is cheap. Mac Pro is priced competitively,  that's what I've said.



> Well your opinion is subjective


 Press F9 and Exposé instantly tiles all of your open windows, scales them down and neatly arranges them, so you can see what’s in every single one.

Press F10, and Exposé instantly tiles all of your open, say, Photoshop  windows while causing all of the open windows of other applications to fade to a delightful shade of grey. The clutter cleared, you can easily find the document you need.

Press F11 and Exposé hides all open windows, giving you instant access to your desktop. Want to open a document you just downloaded? Check to see if the CD or DVD you're burning in the background is ready? Or quickly locate and drag a file into an email as an enclosure? Exposé makes it a snap.

You can also use gestures -- moving the mouse over one of the display corners -- to activate any of the three Exposé actions. Simply use System Preference to assign each Exposé action to a different corner. And those who use a multi-button mouse can also assign Exposé actions to the extra buttons on your favorite rodent.

Isn't OS X more flexible than Windows?


----------



## gxsaurav (Jun 24, 2007)

> There's an optional Paths menu, or you can command-click on the title bar to see the hierarchy and go back through it.
> 
> If you want to view a file's path, there are several ways to view the hierarchical path to a particular file. Use any of these:
> Set the Finder window view to Columns, and read the path from left to right.
> ...



None of this allows me to copy the path address like I can do in Windows Explorer.

Rest is subjective to Mac UI & isn't required in Windows.


----------



## nepcker (Jun 24, 2007)

gx_saurav said:
			
		

> Rest is subjective to Mac UI & isn't required in Windows.


The same is true about the 'Cut' option and some others in Mac OS X. The ways Mac OS X and Windows work are different.


----------



## gxsaurav (Jun 24, 2007)

nepcker said:
			
		

> The same is true about the 'Cut' option and some others in Mac OS X. The ways Mac OS X and Windows work are different.



Lolz....again, nothing proper to say. Windows Exploer like said before many times, supports drag & drop as well as cut option while Mac doesn't. So which one u think gives more felxibility?

The thing which u can do in windows using one button or one hand, you need to press multiple keys in mac to do that.  Example

1) Cycling tabs in safari = command+shift + ]. In IE = Ctrl+tab

2) Delete a file in Mac = Command + backspace. In Windows delete key

3) Open a File in Mac = command+O. In Windows just press the enter key

4) No insert key in Mac

5) No delete key in Mac

6) No support for Function keys locks

7) No Support for sticky keys


----------



## aryayush (Jun 24, 2007)

gx_saurav said:
			
		

> No Support for sticky keys


The second most stupid "feature" in Windows right after the grouping similar Windows in the taskbar under one button "feature".

The path of any file can be copied from its Get Info window. One does not need to do that anyway as you can simply drag any file to a textbox and its path will be pasted there.


----------



## gxsaurav (Jun 24, 2007)

aryayush said:
			
		

> The second most stupid "feature" in Windows right after the grouping similar Windows in the taskbar under one button "feature".



Typical Macboy : If Mac OS X lacks a feature, then it is not required. Anything which is not made by Apple or Mac OS shouldn't exist. Since you don't play games, u don't know how much sticky keys help.

[/quote]The path of any file can be copied from its Get Info window. One does not need to do that anyway as you can simply drag any file to a textbox and its path will be pasted there.[/quote]

And you call this convenient? I just tried to get the path of a file using the "Get Info" Menu. It said "Where : xxxx" but I was not able to "copy" this path. In Windows I can do this by just clicking on the address bar & copying.


----------



## aryayush (Jun 24, 2007)

My bad, I did not actually try to copy that. Why do you want to copy it anyway? Just answer the question and leave the stupid comments aside. Or even with those included, don't skate around answering this question.


----------



## gxsaurav (Jun 24, 2007)

aryayush said:
			
		

> My bad, I did not actually try to copy that. Why do you want to copy it anyway? Just answer the question and leave the stupid comments aside. Or even with those included, don't skate around answering this question.


 jump 8 pages behind this page & read those 4 posts i wrote about why I need address bar.

The path bar in Mac only allows me to go behind from where I came. The breadcrumb bar in Vista allows me to go anywhere I want.


----------



## aryayush (Jun 24, 2007)

How exactly?


----------



## iMav (Jun 24, 2007)

u have vista use it then u will understand its difficult to teach a kid about how things work unless they actually try it out themselves


----------



## gxsaurav (Jun 25, 2007)

This is how the "Path" works in Mac.

It shows you the path up to root drive from where u r. You can jump to any folder directly in the backward tree.

This is how the Breadcrumb address bar in Vista works.

*img128.imageshack.us/img128/2158/breadcrumbgx6.th.jpg

See the difference, just by clicking the address bar arrow I can jump directly to any folder inside a folder from where I came from.

I can also copy the address bar text. This comes in handy in situations such as 

1) i am changing icons using Icon Packager. Now, I select a to change system folder icons & the icons are saved in d:\downloads\vista. Insted of going to that folder again & again, i can simply copy the address & paste it in open dialog to directly jump to that path.

There are several ways in which address bar comes in handy. The reason we Windows users don't open many explorer Windows & drag & drop because

1) We can do everything related to file management from one Explorer windows only.

2) We can jump from anywhere, to anywhere using the tree navigation

3) We can jump anywhere to anywhere using the breadcrumb bar

Just now, I had this image of breadcrumb bar saved somewhere in my computer. I just opened ACDSee & searched for "bread" & it showed me this pic. I copied the address of the folder where this file was & pasted the address in open dialog to jump directly to this image.


----------



## Avatar (Jun 25, 2007)

aryayush said:
			
		

> The second most stupid "feature" in Windows right after the grouping similar Windows in the taskbar under one button "feature".


 
Very rude and foolish at the same time,  

_Sticky keys is a accessibility feature to aid handicapped users. It allows the user to press a modifier key like Shift, Ctrl, Alt, and have it remain active until another key is pressed._

After reading your rubbish statement, I have become sure of the fact that MAC has a feature for *mentally handicapped* people if not for physically handicapped.


----------



## gxsaurav (Jun 25, 2007)

Avatar said:
			
		

> Very rude and foolish at the same time,
> 
> After reading your rubbish statement, I have become sure of the fact that MAC has a feature for *mentally handicapped* people if not for physically handicapped.


El Jobso has made Mac so easy , that any idiot can use Mac. Infact most of the idiots in this world use Mac . Including 3 people in this forum.


----------



## QwertyManiac (Jun 25, 2007)

gx_saurav said:
			
		

> El Jobso has made Mac so easy , that any idiot can use Mac. *Infect* most of the idiots in this world use Mac . Including 3 people in this forum.



.


----------



## nepcker (Jun 25, 2007)

@gx_saurav:

Do you mean an address bar like shown in the below picture?
*arstechnica.com/paedia/f/finder/images/browser.jpg


----------



## iMav (Jun 25, 2007)

yup how can we get that in tiger ? please after cut this is the next thing that i disparately need


----------



## goobimama (Jun 25, 2007)

That's not finder is it? Must be Pathfinder or something. Anyway, for what its worth, I don't know what the fuss is all about...with the address bar n all. 

And as for that breadcrumbs bar, thanks a lot gx, for I was confused all along thinking what that 'drop down' actually was...


----------



## iMav (Jun 25, 2007)

na its not path finder i have path finder ... well its easier to reach the directory when u know the address rather than clicking jumping springing


----------



## aryayush (Jun 26, 2007)

gx_saurav said:
			
		

> This is how the "Path" works in Mac.
> 
> It shows you the path up to root drive from where u r. You can jump to any folder directly in the backward tree.
> 
> ...


That is because you insist on not using the Column view. There is nothing better than the column view.


----------



## goobimama (Jun 26, 2007)

^^ Spot on!


----------



## iMav (Jun 26, 2007)

aryayush said:
			
		

> There is nothing better than the column view.


 there is something known as the breadcrumb bar and tree view which are better than a simple column view but they apparently feature in an OS made by a company which for some absurd reason u want to show as if u hate so u wont accept as it is better than the 1 u r using coz at the end of the dsay u will always remain as the un-paid salesman for apple


----------



## gxsaurav (Jun 26, 2007)

arya said:
			
		

> That is because you insist on not using the Column view. There is nothing better than the column view.


According to your opinion. Not mine. If u like something it doesn't mean that I will like it too. I find one Window approach of tree view or breadcrumb bar better then small columns. Using tree view we don't need to have multiple Windows for drag & drop, just drag from one folder to another in tree in the same Window. All file management can be done in one Windows & thats why we don't open multiple Windows in Windows Vista & Explorer cos we don't need it.

Drag & drop looks fancy, but nothing too good.

Hey arya, let me know if you have something like this in Finder. I can send any file from anywhere using this too, without even using command+mouse drag. Now this is called convenient. *The SendTo menu in Windows Explorer.

*img518.imageshack.us/img518/6752/untitledyl6.jpg
*
*What we can do in Windows with one keyboard button (delete) we need to do with multiple keyboard buttons in Mac (command+backspace)*



			
				iMav said:
			
		

> coz at the end of the dsay u will always remain as the un-paid salesman for apple


 you hurt his ego & the only way to get Apple product for cheap


----------



## Zeeshan Quireshi (Jun 26, 2007)

aryayush said:
			
		

> That is because you insist on not using the Column view. There is nothing better than the column view.


Oh yeah , and God forbid if you want to write a simple program or a shell script , then you'll have to manually trace out the whole address and then type it too , rather than just copy-paste it into your script .


----------



## iMav (Jun 26, 2007)

^^ thats the mac way ... its amazing aint it


----------



## sakumar79 (Jun 26, 2007)

@gx, there is one feature in column view that is missing in tree view, or any combined view in Windows... In column view, as we browse the hierarchy of a folder, we see all the subfolders and files in the parent folders. For example, if you are in C:\WINDOWS\system32\DirectX\Dinput, you will see the files and folders of C:\, C:\WIndows, C:\Windows\system32, C:\Windows\system32\DirectX in the corresponding column. This feature is useful in some cases. And I am not sure if that is the only advantage of column view. But it is the most obvious (to me atleast)... I did find this feature in a explorer replacement utility called UltraExplorer. The software was slightly painful to use because of a tendency it had to occasionally go out of focus after completion of some mouse drag-drop operation, but on the whole, it was useful for my backup work. 

Arun


----------



## goobimama (Jun 26, 2007)

iMav said:
			
		

> ^^ thats the mac way ... its amazing aint it



As for me, I wouldn't say the column view is the heart and soul of what OS X is. But just for argument sake, the same way you cannot live without the "cut" feature in OS X, I can't live without the column view in Windows...


----------



## gxsaurav (Jun 26, 2007)

For those users saying that "Zoom" is better then "Full Screen Maximise" in Windows. I made these 2 videos showing the benefit.

1) This is when finder is working in full screen. As you can see, i m cycling through folders & every file is showing completely in folders. Whether a folder has 10 files or 2 it is showing it completely.

2) This is when I m using the Zoom functionality of Mac OS X. As you can see how bad it works. Suppose I m in a folder with 20 files, & using the zoom feature it zoom accordingly. Now if I go to another folder with only 2 files & zoom, the finder Window resizes. Now If I again & go to a folder having 20 files...boom, the folder needs to be zoomed again. *You need to zoom the finder window every time if u are cycling multiple Windows.*

Just tell me how is Finder convenient.


----------



## sakumar79 (Jun 26, 2007)

@gx, you have occasionally "missed" my points (I am sure aryayush will say you have missed most of his points, but thats besides the point that I am making. I would like to point out that the pun with the word points is pointless, but just for fun... ). 

I request you again to comment on my earlier post regarding column view's use. 

Also, I request aryayush, nepcker, goobimama, etc. to also comment on my views on the column view layout and point out (for my knowledge at least) any additional feature this view gives.

Arun


----------



## gxsaurav (Jun 26, 2007)

Oh! I am sorry, I was busy chatting. Anyway, let me clear a misconception.


			
				arun said:
			
		

> as we browse the hierarchy of a folder, we see all the subfolders and files in the parent folders. For example, if you are in C:\WINDOWS\system32\DirectX\Dinput, you will see the files and folders of C:\, C:\WIndows, C:\Windows\system32, C:\Windows\system32\DirectX in the corresponding column.




  Yup, Windows Explorer doesn’t show it in the viewport. But we do have this feature in Vista in the breadcrumb bar. I guess you are talking about something like this.

*img530.imageshack.us/img530/4072/imagehj1.jpg



    Using this, we can jump from DirectX folder to any folder in the path backward same way in column view. However Vista does it much better by allowing you to use the viewport for the the folder in which u r right now by showing the icons in any size. The Icons in column view are 16p, very small. If they would have allowed big icon size then yeah, it might have been good. However it is nothing that we miss in Windows Explorer


----------



## sakumar79 (Jun 26, 2007)

Since I dont have Vista (still using XP), I dont know much about the breadcrumb bar, so I cant say anything with full certainity... But, please clarify this - 1. In the drop down list from the breadcrumb bar, does the list include folders only or files and folders. 2. Can we drag-and-drop from source to destination by using breadcrumb bar different subfolder as destination (ie, in the above screenshot of yours, showing directx subfolder in the main window, drag a file and drop it into catroot32 subfolder) or cut and paste through right-click on the different subfolder. (For drag-and-drop, please confirm how you get the drop down to initiate while holding the dragged file - hold over for a while like the tree view?

Big icon size in column view doesnt seem like a good idea, considering the difficulty it would cause to scroll... Of course, giving the user an option to modify the size will be useful, and I will leave to aryayush and co. to enlighten me on the possibility of doing it.

Maybe breadcrumb bar is a sufficient alternative to the column view. I dont know. Having used neither, I cannot make a comment... However, with what little I have found about column view, I know that there is no alternative to it in Win XP Explorer, except through the third party replacement application, which still needs some work.

Arun


----------



## iMav (Jun 26, 2007)

well arun i would rather go for explorer's breadcrumb setup and the tree view coz it gives me more ability and flexibility to work as compared column view which only shows all files in the previous folder  the tree view and breadcrumb bar give u the flexibility to move around within 1 windows and also enable u to copy, cut create shortcuts 

this is 1 major reason why i hate the column view ... it doesnt group the files and folders which means as u can see i have a folder in which i wanna move the file or select ... i will have to go thru the entire content list

now u see arun we just dont say something's not good unless it isnt the case but mac boys only choose to bash competitor's work

*img405.imageshack.us/img405/9400/screenshot02ht3.th.jpg

also if u wanna open a particular file type it will show u all the files in the folder ... which means u wanna open a psd file which in a folder which contains txt, docs, exe etc all the files will be shown they will be greyed but will be showed which is absolutely not necessary


----------



## aryayush (Jun 26, 2007)

Oh, Mac applications have the 'File >> Open...' command too? You mean to say there actually are people in this world who use Macs and do not drag files to their respective dock icons to open them? WOW, never knew that!


@sakumar79, yes, it only shows you the folders in the bread crumb bar and no, you cannot drag things over to it. Like I've said before, it is a very poor implementation of the column view.


----------



## iMav (Jun 26, 2007)

what are u talking man


----------



## gxsaurav (Jun 26, 2007)

sakumar79 said:
			
		

> 1. In the drop down list from the breadcrumb bar, does the list include folders only or files and folders.



Just folders



> Can we drag-and-drop from source to destination by using breadcrumb bar different subfolder as destination (ie, in the above screenshot of yours, showing directx subfolder in the main window, drag a file and drop it into catroot32 subfolder) or cut and paste through right-click on the different subfolder. (For drag-and-drop, please confirm how you get the drop down to initiate while holding the dragged file - hold over for a while like the tree view?



Nope, why do u need drag here? Either drag to the tree or favorite sidebar  or cut-> go to destination folder using bread crumb bar & paste. Once you cut, your hands are free to work on other keys. While u drag your hands are locked on mouse & keyboard cos if u leave the mouse button the drag pile vanishes. You can do this, or simply simply open the other folder in another Explorer view & then drag & drop. Windows Explorer supports both while Finder only support one method.



> Maybe breadcrumb bar is a sufficient alternative to the column view. I dont know. Having used neither, I cannot make a comment... However, with what little I have found about column view, I know that there is no alternative to it in Win XP Explorer, except through the third party replacement application, which still needs some work.



Breadcrumb bar lets you work without opening multiple windows. You can do whatever u want in one Explorer window only. You are comparing Windows XP (2001) with an OS released in 2005 (Tiger)

The Windows Explorer Open File view in Windows Vista can be customised too unlike the Finders open window view which either support column or list view. No Icon view, no icon resizing...no file type sorting or hiding..nothing.


----------



## sakumar79 (Jun 26, 2007)

aryayush said:
			
		

> Oh, Mac applications have the 'File >> Open...' command too? You mean to say there actually are people in this world who use Macs and do not drag files to their respective dock icons to open them? WOW, never knew that



If you have Photoshop open with a file, and you want to open another file, dont you use the File>>Open command to open the new file? Do you go to the desktop, find the file in Finder and drag onto dock? Wouldnt that be cumbersome?

@gx_saurav: Having the convenience of drag-drop onto breadcrumb bar would have been good. The breadcrumb bar would have been better than tree for this because of the reduced space utilisation... And sorry that Im comparing XP with Tiger, but I have XP and I am trying to learn about Mac here... (When I do get my hands on Vista, I will try it also and then compare it with Mac, but currently I have no interest in upgrading my XP to Vista for atleast a year).

I can imagine the breadcrumb bar based on reading on this forum, reading various articles in the net, and trying out an implementation on XP through UltraExplorer... It may not be accurate, but the feeling I got is that in some cases, using it with tree would still not give me the ease that column view would give me... Of course, there are many situations where the tree view (by itself) would be faster (or at least as fast as) than the column view, but that is a separate issue. My situation was this - In my dad's office, we generate a lot of structural drawings, and these are stored for backup based on job number. Each project is given a job number starting from 1001 (currently it is above 4300). Now, earlier jobs were mainly done manually, and computer drawing files were minimum. Current jobs almost always are done on computer. Now, the jobs are backed up in groups of main folders "Upto2000", "Upto2500", etc and subfolders within the main folder for each project is created "2001","2002",etc... Sometimes, our drafting staff put files in the wrong project folder, and sometimes even put folder within another project folder or wrong group folder... Recently, I decided to back up the files on an external HDD. I wanted to rearrange the drawings in the correct order. Through column view arrangement in UltraExplorer, I managed to finish the work reasonably fast. I had to use it in conjunction with a separate Explorer Window because of some limitations in its features and some minor bugs in the program, but I think that those limitations/bugs would probably not have been there in Finder...

Arun


----------



## iMav (Jun 26, 2007)

dude believe me when u will use both of them u will be in a better position to decide ... 

column view is only good on certain occasions ... have a look the screenshot post of mine


----------



## Zeeshan Quireshi (Jun 26, 2007)

aryayush said:
			
		

> Oh, Mac applications have the 'File >> Open...' command too? You mean to say there actually are people in this world who use Macs and do not drag files to their respective dock icons to open them? WOW, never knew that!
> 
> 
> @sakumar79, yes, it only shows you the folders in the bread crumb bar and no, you cannot drag things over to it. Like I've said before, it is a very poor implementation of the column view.


I think arya you skipped my File-Location point . plz provide how to copy file location of any file easily .


----------



## aryayush (Jun 26, 2007)

sakumar79 said:
			
		

> If you have Photoshop open with a file, and you want to open another file, dont you use the File>>Open command to open the new file? Do you go to the desktop, find the file in Finder and drag onto dock? Wouldnt that be cumbersome?


Isn't it easier? Think about it.

A large icon is there in the dock present at all times. When you are working on an image in Photoshop, you click on a Finder window in the background (remember than Photoshop on Mac OS X does not have an incredibly useless gray background that blocks access to all other windows) and drag your stuff onto the Photoshop icon. If it is on the desktop, simple drag your mouse to a corner of the screen; every window slides out of the way and the desktop appears. Drag the photo to the Photoshop icon and everything slides back onto the desktop and the image opens in Photoshop. The best way is to hit 'Command + Space' even while in Photoshop, type the first few letters of the file you wish to open and hit 'Command + Return'. The file shows up in the Finder and you can drag it to the Photoshop icon. You can, of course, also drag a bunch of files onto the icon.

In any case, all three approaches are better than opening Photoshop, hitting 'Ctrl + O', navigating to the file and then opening it. Ever since I've switched to the Mac, I've never opened any file in any application that way. And when I was on Windows, I opened every file in every application that way. Even though Mac OS X supports both approaches, the Mac way is so much better that normal people just do not use the Windows way any more after switching. 

@Zeeshan Quireshi, I'll tell you about this later. I've never needed it so I never enquired about it but I'll ask on some Apple forum and tell you.


----------



## goobimama (Jun 26, 2007)

Here's another kicker.

Say you open an image file in an application "Preview" which is the default for opening PDFs, Jpegs, PNGs and the like. Now you suddenly want to edit that file but you closed the Finder window, so you will have to get to the file again. 

But one can just Command + drag the image icon on the top of the title bar of Preview into the photoshop dock icon....automatically opens it.

This works for other applications/file types as well, I just gave a hypothetical situation...


----------



## gxsaurav (Jun 27, 2007)

aryayush said:
			
		

> Isn't it easier? Think about it.



Lolz...you call that convinient. I don't even need to open any other explorer window. Just ctrl+o which open photoshop Open Dialog in "My Pictures" folder, then from there just open any file which even shows a preview of it right there in open Window.

I wonder how you call that long process convinient.



> Say you open an image file in an application "Preview" which is the default for opening PDFs, Jpegs, PNGs and the like. Now you suddenly want to edit that file but you closed the Finder window, so you will have to get to the file again.
> 
> But one can just Command + drag the image icon on the top of the title bar of Preview into the photoshop dock



Here is another Eye opener, when you View an image in Windows Photo Viewer, just click on the toolbar button "Open..." & open in photoshoop.

About draging a file to dock icon, just drag any file to a shortcut of the application or to the taskbar icon fo the opened application & that application will come in foreground for u to drop the file in.


----------



## goobimama (Jun 27, 2007)

Well suppose the application is not in the list? You got to hunt it down with the "Open with" thing. 

Also, I said this was a hypothetical situation. Preview is just an example, there are many other apps/files which behave this way. 

As for dragging to the taskbar, you seriously thing one can use those tiny icons to drag and drop a file, of which vista makes such a huge preview out of?
*img510.imageshack.us/img510/1958/untitledet8.jpg
And how many apps can one have in the taskbar "quicklaunch"?


----------



## gxsaurav (Jun 27, 2007)

^^^ I said taskbar icon of the open application. Not Quicklaunch. Your post is wrong.


----------



## goobimama (Jun 27, 2007)

ah. Okay. But the application has to be open then. In OS X the app doesn't even have to be open...


----------



## gxsaurav (Jun 27, 2007)

If photoshop isn't running & u drag a file to that icon, won't photoshop start?

(or any other application for that matters)


----------



## iMav (Jun 27, 2007)

man arya u seripously dont know how to use computers efficiently for everything u always have had a long method .... dude use windows ul find shorter quicker and more efficient ways of working  seriously


----------



## gxsaurav (Jun 27, 2007)

arya said:
			
		

> Who cares for the usability. I have 25 Windows open when I just need 4. Who cares how slow I work when it looks good. Time isn't important while doing work on computers, only looks is


----------



## iMav (Jun 27, 2007)

so much for the gr8 column view it shows thumbnails if it wishes to ...

*img291.imageshack.us/img291/3820/screenshot01na6.th.jpg

and this when re-sizing the icons comes in handy .... arun i hope u see this coz u and many others said re-sizable icons are use less .... have a look at the screen shot browse thru an image folder and in vista u can have different sized thumbnailed views for a window

*img297.imageshack.us/img297/8007/screenshot02vk5.th.jpg


----------



## aryayush (Jun 27, 2007)

The column view shows the thumbnails every single time without fail if you have not turned it off. Even if you post a video showing me how it is not showing thumbnails on your "hackintosh", I won't believe it can ever be true on an actual Mac. In my ten months of using it, it has never happened to me and I have not heard any such complaint on any Apple forum. You are either lying, plain and simple, or you did something stupid and are blaming the operating system for it.

I am aware that I am speaking to a person who once thought that dragging something to the dock deletes it and that the OS cannot work with plain text files.


----------



## iMav (Jun 27, 2007)

it is dude it shows me sometimes and it doesnt some times ... iv posted the screen shot when it didnt i can post a video also ... give a few minutes ...

dragging something to wrong section of the dock deletes it  now only a salesman can know which is the correct section before hand users cant


----------



## gxsaurav (Jun 27, 2007)

aryayush said:
			
		

> The column view shows the thumbnails every single time without fail if you have not turned it off. Even if you post a video showing me how it is not showing thumbnails on your "hackintosh", I won't believe it can ever be true on an actual Mac. In my ten months of using it, it has never happened to me and I have not heard any such complaint on any Apple forum.



I just confirmed this. Mac fails to show thumbnail of images sometimes if it is on network drive. In our case it is treating our NTFS drives as network drives.



> You are either lying, plain and simple, or you did something stupid and are blaming the operating system for it.



Arya : Mac cannot have any flaw


----------



## iMav (Jun 27, 2007)

*Here is ur video* .... sorry for the bad quality but its better than the iphone ... hell the iphone cant even record videos leave alone video quality


----------



## aryayush (Jun 27, 2007)

I said that iMav is "either lying, plain and simple, or he did something stupid and is blaming the operating system for it." Here is simple proof of that:





			
				iMav said:
			
		

> dragging something to wrong section of the dock deletes it


Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha!  


I cannot believe you still have not figured out something as simple as the dock and virtual shortcuts. LOL! 

Dragging anything to any section of the Dock does not delete it. Ha! Ha! Are you in Kindergarten or something!


----------



## gxsaurav (Jun 27, 2007)

The column view would have been better if we could increse the icon size. Too bad Jobs doesn' think like that.

By the way, when did iMav said that


----------



## iMav (Jun 27, 2007)

arya u dumb ass salesman do this:

open finder ... select the folder say applications from the favorite list and drag it next to the finder icon in the dock and see what happens ... ur frickin idiot man ... what kinda salesman are u when u dont even know the product ur selling ...


----------



## gxsaurav (Jun 27, 2007)

iMav, that just deleted the shortcut, not the real folder.


----------



## iMav (Jun 27, 2007)

yup thts wat i said it deletes it .... btw mac fool what do u have to say about ur gr8 column view ... i hope u saw the video


----------



## gxsaurav (Jun 27, 2007)

Point. Shouldn't it move the shortcut from Sidebar to dock. I mean, thats more natural.


----------



## W i d e S c r e e N (Jun 28, 2007)

sorry for "irrelevence" 
but can anyone direct me to somebody who can help me with MAC OSX86 10.4.9 installation thank you.


----------



## gxsaurav (Jun 28, 2007)

Sorry, discussion & help about Mac OS X on a non-Apple topic is illegal here. All I can say is that google is your best friend.

One thing I found while working on Mac. Due to no full screen window concept, you end up with many windows on Mac.  even those which are open stay above the dock. It is really very hard to work on mac on a 17" Monitor with 1024X768 pixel resolution.


----------



## goobimama (Jun 28, 2007)

Command + H is your friend then...

Here's a nice one:

My friend who had recently bought the Macbook asked me how to transfer stuff from her old PC to the Mac via LAN. Asked me how to set up the Mac to connect with the PC.

"There's no settings to tinker on the Mac end", I said. 
"Cannot be. Isn't it like a different system? I've heard of all incompatibilities n all" she said
"Well the settings have to be done with Windows (XP), nothing needs to be changed on the mac" I said.

Rightly enough, she had to run the network setup wizard (guidance from an idiot named Milind), "Share" each drive, and all that whatnot. She didn't have to change ONE setting on the mac. Nothing. Just plug the network in, and its done.


----------



## gxsaurav (Jun 28, 2007)

I did it between Vista & XP Laptop. Just connected through LAN Cable & went to network center & clicked to auto discover a network or LAN & boom, node detected & network configured in instnat. Then just copied the projects.

It isn't that hard as u assume it to be.


----------



## aryayush (Jun 28, 2007)

iMav said:
			
		

> arya u dumb ass salesman do this:
> 
> open finder ... select the folder say applications from the favorite list and drag it next to the finder icon in the dock and see what happens ... ur frickin idiot man ... what kinda salesman are u when u dont even know the product ur selling ...


LOL! This is fun. 

Those items in the Finder sidebar are virtual aliases. Dragging them anywhere out of the sidebar makes them go 'poof'. It has no relation to the Dock. Similarly, the icons in the Dock are also virtual aliases.

You are having trouble understanding a basic concept that even a six year old would catch on in an instant. I've never seen anyone having trouble using the Dock, of all things. Ha! Ha!


----------



## gxsaurav (Jun 28, 2007)

aryayush said:
			
		

> LOL! This is fun.
> 
> Those items in the Finder sidebar are virtual aliases. Dragging them anywhere out of the sidebar makes them go 'poof'. It has no relation to the Dock. Similarly, the icons in the Dock are also virtual aliases.
> 
> You are having trouble understanding a basic concept that even a six year old would catch on in an instant. I've never seen anyone having trouble using the Dock, of all things. Ha! Ha!


Actually iMav isn't wrong. Read my point. Those virtual alias will delete itself if dragged anywhere else. But if dragged to dock it should go to the folder side of dock. If you bring it on dock & release it, it should go back to old place without getting deleted.


----------



## aryayush (Jun 29, 2007)

Why?


----------



## gxsaurav (Jun 29, 2007)

Because *according to you, Mac OS X supports full drag & drop* & is very convinient to use. In this case* it is not.* This is whats natural....

In Windows Vista, we can drag & drop anything to the Quicklaunch area in taskbar to make a shortcut to it. 

We can drag any folder to the sidebar to make a shortcut to that folder

We can drag any shortcut from favorite bar to QuickLaunch bar

We can drag any shortcut from favorite bar to any other explorer window or start menu. 

We can drag & drop a file to an application in start menu & it will open with that app

We can drag & drop anything anywhere.


----------



## praka123 (Jun 29, 2007)

In Vista,can u select some text,say from some editor or browser and drag them to desktop to make a text file?


----------



## gxsaurav (Jun 29, 2007)

> In Vista,can u select some text,say from some editor or browser and drag them to desktop to make a text file?


 
That again depends on the application & application developer.

You will obviously need to open notepad, so just right click->new file on desktop which is not available in Mac, & make a new txt file & paste the text in it.

Or if the application supports, just drag & drop text from IE 7 to any compatible Text editor & it will paste it in there.


----------



## QwertyManiac (Jun 29, 2007)

Heh gx, learn to say no to a few things. Drag-pasting is one thing, creating quick text files by just dropping is another.


----------



## praka123 (Jun 29, 2007)

^and @qwertymaniac you know the answer,I suppose


----------



## gxsaurav (Jun 29, 2007)

QwertyManiac said:
			
		

> Heh gx, learn to say no to a few things. Drag-pasting is one thing, creating quick text files by just dropping is another.



Well, in that case I acknowledge. *Windows Explorer in Vista doesn't allow you to drag & drop text from a web page to any explorer Window, to automatically save it as a Text file. You will need to copy paste the text you selected in a web page to a text file somewhere you create.
*
Personally I don't miss this feature. But it should be included. It makes sense to copy paste text to a text document in Windows Explorer which you can make anywhere in Explorer using the right click -> "New text document" method,  a feature not available in Mac OS X. 

Linux is beyond the scope of this thread, so is GNOME or KDE's ability. I do admit that the screen shot capturing method of Ubuntu is the best out there. Just press Print screen key & it will take a screen shot & ask u where to save it.


----------



## aryayush (Jun 29, 2007)

gx_saurav said:
			
		

> We can drag & drop anything anywhere.


Ha! Ha! 

The last thing a Windows user should be shouting about is the drag-and-drop functionality supported in the OS. It sucks.


I am curious though, what happens when you drag a shortcut out of the sidebar in Explorer to some other place? And how do you remove it? (I know, right click >> delete. Dragging it out is far more convenient.)


----------



## goobimama (Jun 29, 2007)

> Personally I don't miss this feature.



Oh! Suddenly someone doesn't find a feature interesting! I wonder why? Ah! Cause 'dows doesn't have it! Now of course Windows is allowed not to have some (many) features of the mac, but then again, I won't hold it against MS, unlike some people who just can't let go of the cut feature....

Anyway, that being said, drag and drop on windows is nothing like on the Mac...its a totally different trip, especially with expose...



> It makes sense to copy paste text to a text document in Windows Explorer which you can make anywhere in Explorer using the right click -> "New text document" method, a feature not available in Mac OS X.



What's the point of creating an empty text document? I would rather open textedit, paste the stuff in there and then save it. This is just a long cut method which only _newbies_ miss....and can be rectified with a little applescript...


----------



## Avatar (Jun 29, 2007)

I feel like dragging and dropping someone from this thread to a garbage bin, i wonder who is most compatible , a Mac user or a Windows . hmm....


----------



## gxsaurav (Jun 29, 2007)

aryayush said:
			
		

> The last thing a Windows user should be shouting about is the drag-and-drop functionality supported in the OS. It sucks.



Did you again overlooked the "Eye Openers" which pwned you when u said "No chance in hell" 



> I am curious though, what happens when you drag a shortcut out of the sidebar in Explorer to some other place? And how do you remove it? (I know, right click >> delete. Dragging it out is far more convenient.)



Arya, another eye opener for u, i think u are now blind that u never see the eye opener videos. 

*Drag & drop links to & from favorite sidebar*

1) When you drag a shortcut from favorite sidebar to explorer window. It moves the shortcut to that folder in explorer. Much more natural then Finder in which the shortcut gets deleted.

2) To delete, either right click & select delete , or drag that shortcut to Recycle Bin.



			
				goobi said:
			
		

> Oh! Suddenly someone doesn't find a feature interesting! I wonder why? Ah! Cause 'dows doesn't have it!



Goobi, why did u wrote only half text . This is what I wrote



			
				Me said:
			
		

> Personally I don't miss this feature. *But it should be included.*





> I would rather open textedit, paste the stuff in there and then save it.



Open notepad, paste the text there & save it. Done. 

What is it better in finder then Explorer? Nothing.


----------

