Don’t Like OS X’s Clunky, Ancient Finder? Replace It

t5tr said:

I haven’t tried PF 5 yet, I’m still using PF 4, mainly because I know ‘ll buy the upgrade the same day I install it…
Just remembering that the PF terminal with its tabbed interface is also an improvement over the native Terminal.app.
Being able to preview .doc / .xls files even if no office installed is also noteworthy.

Tim said:

Only frick’in morons think they are more “productive” with some half-baked replacement for the Finder.
————————
Well, this frick’in moron has cut his workload in half using PathFinder.  I teach online, and I have to do a lot of downloading, uploading, sorting, and sifting.  I have to write a lot of comments.  And PathFinder gives me a lot more flexibility and speed in doing this.  And I have given Apple’s Finder more than a fair chance.  I suspect you haven’t even tried Path Finder, else you would know it’s anything but half-baked.  These guys put actual thought and craftsmanship into their product.  So, why don’t you go blog negatively on CNN or something if you can’t offer any actual useful commentary?

Elijah said:

Only frick’in morons think they are more “productive” with some half-baked replacement for the Finder. I put them in the same camp as the lunatics who claim Ogg Vorbis should replace the mp3 format, namely techno-wannabees who don’t have a clue and want to try and impress someone with their screwball preferences.

M. Hey said:

Poor Apple (oh, yeh!).  Sorry, I mean “poor” Apple cannot win….  If they leave the Finder alone they are criticised for failing to include better features.  If they improve the Finder they will be castigated for snatching the bread from developers’ mouths.  This is what happened when widgets were introduced to Tiger: cries of outrage went up on behalf of Konfabulator.  I think the Finder should be left as it is and Mac users should be encouraged to try PathFinder (or Leap, or whatever).  That way everyone’s a winner!

leapfrogger said:

Leap is more of an image browser than a true Finder. And expensive!! $60 to find files? I don’t think so.

Mike Chace-Ortiz said:

Ironic Software’s Leap looks and acts like a modern Finder should.

Surprised you missed it.  Check it out!

catwalker said:

Actually, OS X’s current Finder has roots in both the old NeXT systems and Mac OS Classic (whatever versions). To state that it ONLY comes from NeXT is just plain wrong. Get your facts straight. I’ve used a Mac for 20 years and actually owned a NeXT cube. The OS X Finder is NOT NeXT and it’s not far removed from the last version of the old Classic Mac Finder.

PathFinder is more evolutionary, than revolutionary, borrowing from the current Finder, and adding a bunch of new features.

I love the tabs, though.

Mike said:

Wrong! The OSX Finder does NOT come from Classic, it comes from NeXT/OpenStep. Absolutely no relationship to the OS9 (and earlier) Finder.

Editor’s Note: Except that the current Finder borrows many features from the original OS 9 ‘classic’ Finder, as well as from NeXT. The Finder in OS X is an evolutionary change which employs features from both.