From: johnsd2@lib106.its.rpi.edu.its1 (Daniel Norman Johnson)
Subject: Re: How MS could annoy Apple
Reply-To: johnsd2@lib106.its.rpi.edu.its1
Organization: Sun Microsystems, Inc.
Date: Sat, 21 Nov 1992 20:55:09 GMT

In article 1172@yvax.byu.edu, feijai@endor.byu.edu (Sean Luke) writes:
>In article <wfz1nrp@rpi.edu>  writes:
>
>[ regarding the NeXT's Workspace Manager]
>
>>It makes it too inconvinient to see 2 or more directories at once;
>>its a fundamental flaw of the "list of files in a window, which
>>can be made to "view" multiple directories" approach the NeXT does.
>>Certainly the NeXT does it well, but I still find it clumsy+obnoxious.
>>
>>Just spoiled on the Finder I guess. :) Id rather use it that the Windows
>>File Manager. The multi-pane  trick is neat.
>
>Ah.  I understand, and will try to reply here.
>
>The NeXT *does* allow you to see two directories at one time:  pull down  
>two file viewers.  They work like the Mac's Finder windows in this regard.

Uh, no. The Mac does *not* work like that. I know if you start
a second file viewer you can have them view different thigns, but
that's a pain. I find it more convinient to double-click on a folder
and have it open in its own window. This is how the Mac works. As far
as I can tell, this is the thing the NeXT does not do.

>I think that NeXT realised early-on that it had to consolodate the  
>Workspace Managers' window system to avoid window-itis, like the Finder  
>typically has. (You know, 30 windows open to get at the file you need).

My hard drive is not organized THAT badly. :) I never have to open more
than 4. Generally this doesn't happen tho as I can just hold down the option
key and then whenever I open a folder, the window I double-clicked in
to do it closes. Or I can use list views to put more than one level in
one window. I also use aliases to shortcut through what is there, so
most of the time I can get to the file I want by opening one window,
either from the Desktop of my Apple Menu.
   
>This was especially true on the NeXT since it very often will be running,  
>in addition to the Workspace Managers' windows, 10 applications at one  
>time (I've got 5 right now and that's low).  So NeXT designed a file  
>controller that, as elegantly as could be done, allowed you to do all  
>necessary file operations with a single window--hence the NeXT's "shelf".   
>But this still wasn't as intuitive at start as the Finder's multiple  
>window setup, so NeXT also allowed for multiple windows as well, though  
>they are not the default.

Is there a way to do this more conviniently that the default I've seen,
namely that you must explicitly ask for annother window to get one? (which
introduces a several-second delay, at least when Ive seen it used)

>NeXT didn't just come up with their design; they grew into it.  NeXTSTEP  
>1.0 had windows very similar to the Finder.  But like the Finder, 1.0  
>suffered from window-itis cluttering up the screen to the point of  
>confusion.  This is a serious problem on a multitasking OS with a big file  
>system like the NeXT.  So in 2.0 NeXTSTEP moved to its present workspace  
>design.

I see. The "big file system" is the key here I think; on the mac you don't
need to have a deep file system, and that seems to make quite a difference.

>The Finder is more intuitive, but it suffers when you get into large,  
>highly hierarchial file systems.

How large does it have to be to trip it up?

>  You have to learn how to do  
>option-opening of folders and command-clicking on the title bar of windows  
>_very fast_.

I never found these tricks hard. And why the need for particularly
extreme speed here? Can't you just hold down the option key- and keep
it that way till you've got where you're going?

>  The Finder was really designed for small systems with few  
>subdirectories and volumes (like the 128K).  As the Mac moves further away  
>from the simplicity of the 400K disk, I think the Finder's design will  
>slowly prove less useful.

Its already a long way from there. Of course things have changed- apple
has added some of the shortcuts we are describing, plus things like
heirchial list views, nested folders, desktop icons and aliases.

Todays finder is not the same critter that the 128k used. That it seems
the same is undoubtably intentional- Apple seems to like continuity.

> Not that I doubt Apple will come out with an  
>amazing replacement, though.  Aliases are a good step.

I would rather expect that they would favor continuity- they'd
want to make the finder serve.

Imho they've already managed this for "normal" hard drives, although
Id expect that the Finder would become less usefull for drives that
are truely huge. You'd run out of desktop to stick icons on, for one
thing. :/
---
			- Dan Johnson
And God said "Jeeze, this is dull"... and it *WAS* dull. Genesis 0:0

These opinions have had all identifiying marks removed, and are untraceable.
You'll never know whose they are.
Newsgroups: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy