dh07+@andrew.cmu.edu (David Hairston) (10/21/89)
[ddgg0881@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu re-writes:] >>>I have [an] irritation when using the finder: >>>You have two folders open and you want to transfer or >>>copy a file from one to the other. You click on the file >>>you want to move and then its window comes to the front >>>which totally obliterates your view of the destination folder. >>>Yuck! it would have been easier to use DOS or UNIX. . << [RearWindow init and DiskTop cdev recommended, stuff deleted] . >When I wrote the original question I was hoping that someone would >point out some simple solution that I didn't know about because I >haven't read all the tip books. This seems like such a basic operation >that I find it amazing that Apple hasn't bothered to fix up the problem. . umm, if it ain't broke don't fix it ... . >Some people told me that I simply wasn't managing my windows correctly. >These people must know about something I don't know about. If the source >folder and the destination folder are both 4 or 5 levels deep you've, got >the desktop covered before you even begin the copy or move operation. >Again the whole operation could have been done in DOS or UNIX before >you even begin on the Mac. My purpose though is not to dump on the Mac. . but apparently dumping on the Mac isn't entirely out of the question either. in "command-line interfaces" there is at least the risk of typos as you begin to specify files/folders 4 or 5 levels deep. this is also very annoying! of course, you could "cd" successively to each directory along one of the paths (with the potential typo problem) but i don't see any win there. on the mac, file copying/moving is almost too simple. even with 10 folder windows open in the finder on a macplus screen, rounding up the needed files from the source window (appropriately active in front) and moving them to some other folder (all you need to do is hit a pixel in that window) is childs' play. window management is the key here, not all windows need to be the size of a 3x5 index card. look at ResEdit for a clue as to how to handle window placement for successive directories. using such a scheme it is trivial to locate and relocate files, effectively. perhaps a simple rule or one-liner is needed here: to move files: isolate the destination folder first, then open the source. -dave- hairston@henry.ece.cmu.edu
6600pete@ucsbuxa.ucsb.edu (10/21/89)
OK, I cheated. I'm following-up to the wrong person, and the following line is manufactured: [ddgg0881@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu writes:] (and please forgive me if that's not strictly right) >Some people told me that I simply wasn't managing my windows >correctly. That was probably me. >These people must know about something I don't know about. If the source >folder and the destination folder are both 4 or 5 levels deep you've, got >the desktop covered before you even begin the copy or move operation. So close the windows after you're through with them. If you arrange your windows so that they cascade from uper left to lower right, this is a simple task. >Again the whole operation could have been done in DOS or UNIX before >you even begin on the Mac. My purpose though is not to dump on the Mac. BUZZ! No, I'm sorry, but please accept this consolation prize: you've already bought into the Mac interface without knowing it! Do you REALLY copy things from one directory 12 levels deep to another 9 levels deep under DOS or UNIX? I NEVER do that. But I do it on the Mac every day. (Actually, I'm MOVING files, but that's not significant.) With DOS and UNIX, of course, you have the extra-special priveleges of not knowing for sure what's in a directory you're copying/moving to, and overwriting files unintentionally is just about the most fun thing I can think of. Even better, not knowing whether there's a directory corresponding to the last name on your path specification line is GREAT FUN -- the file may be copied/moved into that directory, or a new file may be created with that name! [Checking ahead of time is even better -- you get to type a 60-character pathname TWICE instead of once!] -- | GurgleKat (Pete Gontier), pete@cavevax.ucsb.edu | .UUCP reply addresses bounce; try another path. | ...if you'd gone to Dartmouth, you'd not have had to take the math.
mystone@caen.engin.umich.edu (Dean Yu) (10/21/89)
In article <2638@hub.UUCP> pete@cavevax.ucsb.edu writes: >(Someone else writes this: {Apologies to the actual person}) >>These people must know about something I don't know about. If the source >>folder and the destination folder are both 4 or 5 levels deep you've, got >>the desktop covered before you even begin the copy or move operation. > >So close the windows after you're through with them. If you arrange your >windows so that they cascade from uper left to lower right, this is a >simple task. > This is slightly off the beaten path, but my roomate just found this feature in Finder 6.1.4 last night. Most people I know open folders to get to one specific folder a few levels down, and don't need the higher level folders to stay open. I myself explicitly close the parent folder immediately unless I know I need it. Anyway my roommie found out that if you command-option double-click a folder, that folder's window will open, and the parent window will close. I wonder how long this feature's been around? Let's see you do this on a Unix machine... :) _______________________________________________________________________________ Dean Yu | E-mail: mystone@caen.engin.umich.edu Self-declared License Czar | Real-mail: Dean Yu University of Michigan | 909 Church St Computer Aided Engineering Network | Apt C INCLUDE 'Disclaimers.a' | Ann Arbor, MI 48104 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ddgg0881@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu (10/22/89)
> if it aint broke don't fix it.
It's really a question of side effects. If you want to move a window
you normally end up selecting that window as a side effect.
To avoid selecting the window you have to hold down the control key.
Why should the default assumption be that you wanted to select the window?
You got me. If you want to move a file without side effect you've got to
hunt down some public domain program (which apparently doesn't even work
under multifinder). Again, why should the default assumption be that you
wanted to select the source window. It's a mystery to me.
Dale Gerdemann
University of Illinois, Dept of Linguistics
Cognitive Science Group, Beckman Institute
dale@tarski.cogsci.uiuc.edu
d-gerdemann@uiuc.edujsp@key.COM (James Preston) (10/23/89)
In article <oZDvf3200WB79Bw0U1@andrew.cmu.edu> dh07+@andrew.cmu.edu (David Hairston) writes: >on the mac, file copying/moving is almost too simple. even with 10 >folder windows open in the finder on a macplus screen, rounding up the >needed files from the source window (appropriately active in front) and >moving them to some other folder (all you need to do is hit a pixel in >that window) is childs' play. window management is the key here . . . Different strokes for different folks. Not everyone does things the way you do, and trying to tell someone that his complaint is not valid because he can change his method of operation and thereby remove the irritation is not acceptable. I don't like to clutter my screen with unnecessary windows. I don't normally open a folder unless it is absolutely necessary. To copy a file from folder A to folder B, it is not required that you open folder B, only that you can see it. So your "solution" ("all you need to do is hit a pixel in that window") just doesn't work for me. It is simply too easy and too common to be in a situation where I can see the file I want to copy, I can see the destination folder, I click on the file and watch in annoyance as the destination folder disappears. Your point about window size and "look at how ResEdit does it" are equally invalid for me. I like to avoid the need to scroll whenver possible, and I also like normal-sized icons. Therefore, my windows tend to be on the large side. I agree with your earlier point (deleted to save world-wide transmission costs) that command line interfaces are not better. I think it's unfortunate that the original poster brought that in because I think it only clouds the issue. My point is that, while the Mac interface is good and usually better than command lines, it is not perfect by any stretch of the imagination. Folks like you who seem to be saying, "Oh what are you complaining about? _I_ don't have any problem with it, and anyway it's better than MS-DOS" are not being particularly helpful. I would like to think that, in this forum, we could avoid both MS-DOS bashing and Mac bashing. That someone could say, "Hey, I have trouble with such-and-such" or "I get annoyed by this" and that the responses would be suggestions of helpful cdevs, inits, utilities, etc. (as some here have indeed done on this topic), or that we might get enough of a consensus that a feature is cumbersome, annoying, etc. that word might just possibly get back to Apple so that they could make it better. I hope that this doesn't sound like I'm flaming Mr. Hairston, because that is not my intent. I'm sure that he meant to be helpful. I'm only trying to point out that saying "You should change the way you do things" is not always the best solution. --James Preston
ralph@cbnewsj.ATT.COM (Ralph Brandi) (10/23/89)
In article <465c9aa1.1285f@maize.engin.umich.edu> mystone@sol.engin.umich.edu writes: >I know I need it. Anyway my roommie found out that if you command-option >double-click a folder, that folder's window will open, and the parent window >will close. I wonder how long this feature's been around? Let's see you Actually, you only need to hit the option key in Finder 6.1.4. As a matter of fact, this kind of annoys me. In past Finders, option-clicking a folder open would cause the Finder to `forget' that the window had been open the next time it ran; so, f'rinstance, after I quit playing Crystal Quest, I'm greeted with my regular desktop, and don't have to clean things up before I run Word. It was handy. I liked it. Now it doesn't work. Why? Has this feature been assigned to another obscure keystroke-click combination? (I wouldn't be so upset if this happened in a major update like to 7.0, where I would expect changes to the interface, but 6.0.3 to 6.0.4 is supposed to be a minor upgrade....) -- Ralph Brandi ralph@lzfme.att.com att!lzfme!ralph Work flows toward the competent until they are submerged.
jackiw@cs.swarthmore.edu (Nick Jackiw) (10/24/89)
In article <1566@cbnewsj.ATT.COM> ralph@lzfme.ATT.COM (Ralph Brandi) writes: > In past Finders, > option-clicking a folder open would cause the Finder to `forget' > that the window had been open the next time it ran; so, f'rinstance, > after I quit playing Crystal Quest, I'm greeted with my regular > desktop, and don't have to clean things up before I run Word. It > was handy. I liked it. Now it doesn't work. Why? Has this > feature been assigned to another obscure keystroke-click > combination? This was a very handy feature, but only for those running uniFinder. Under multiFinder, where Finder only quits during resets and shutdowns, Finder never gets the chance to "forget" the windows you opened with option-click. As the world moves toward total multifinderdom, this feature gets less and less useful; and that's probably why it's been replaced. > (I wouldn't be so upset if this happened in a major update like to > 7.0, where I would expect changes to the interface, but 6.0.3 to > 6.0.4 is supposed to be a minor upgrade....) Agreed. > Ralph Brandi ralph@lzfme.att.com att!lzfme!ralph -- _ _|\____ Nick Jackiw | Visual Geometry Project | Math Department / /_/ O> \ ------------+-------------------------+ Swarthmore College | O> | 215-328-8225| jackiw@cs.swarthmore.edu| Swarthmore PA 19081 \_Guernica_/ ------------+-------------------------+ USA -- _ _|\____ Nick Jackiw | Visual Geometry Project | Math Department / /_/ O> \ ------------+-------------------------+ Swarthmore College | O> | 215-328-8225| jackiw@cs.swarthmore.edu| Swarthmore PA 19081 \_Guernica_/ ------------+-------------------------+ USA
jsp@key.COM (James Preston) (10/24/89)
In article <465c9aa1.1285f@maize.engin.umich.edu> mystone@sol.engin.umich.edu writes: >Anyway my roommie found out that if you command-option >double-click a folder, that folder's window will open, and the parent window >will close. Hmmm, I have an SE/30 running 6.0.3 and this doesn't seem to work. Any comments? --James Preston
kehr@felix.UUCP (Shirley Kehr) (10/24/89)
In article <465c9aa1.1285f@maize.engin.umich.edu> mystone@sol.engin.umich.edu writes:
< This is slightly off the beaten path, but my roomate just found this feature
<in Finder 6.1.4 last night. Most people I know open folders to get to one
<specific folder a few levels down, and don't need the higher level folders
<to stay open. I myself explicitly close the parent folder immediately unless
<I know I need it. Anyway my roommie found out that if you command-option
<double-click a folder, that folder's window will open, and the parent window
<will close. I wonder how long this feature's been around? Let's see you
<do this on a Unix machine... :)
Also, for the newer users, don't forget that you can quickly close the
active window with Command-w. It's much faster and easier than trying to
hit that little close box with the mouse pointer (especially on a big
screen--which would also solve Dale Gerdemann's problem :-).
Shirley Kehrgpalmer@pnet02.gryphon.com (Gary Palmer) (10/25/89)
Why not move the file to the desktop, then open the source window and move it
in?
Gary Palmer
UUCP: {ames!elroy, <routing site>}!gryphon!pnet02!gpalmer
INET: gpalmer@pnet02.gryphon.comkehr@felix.UUCP (Shirley Kehr) (10/25/89)
In article <1177@key.COM> jsp@penguin.key.COM (James Preston) writes: <In article <465c9aa1.1285f@maize.engin.umich.edu> mystone@sol.engin.umich.edu writes: <>Anyway my roommie found out that if you command-option <>double-click a folder, that folder's window will open, and the parent window <>will close. < <Hmmm, I have an SE/30 running 6.0.3 and this doesn't seem to work. Neither did it work on a Mac II running 6.0.2.