![]() Path Finder is amazing and blows away both Finder and the TotalFinder additions layer, but it’s been struggling it seems. And honestly, you know what, I love Path Finder. The bottom line is that filtering is indeed a minimal feature. I could see adding a lot of extra logic such as doing something special with FTP could add bloat (but Finder / TotalFinder already supports FTP via the default macOS functionality for FTP mounting… unless Apple removed it? Heck, I’ve not used FTP in Finder for years now anyway and use other apps to mount my SFTP shares, etc.). I have to admit, I was trying to figure out how to reply to remarks without sounding like a total rear and I’m grateful for the points that have been broached.īeing a developer myself and having a bg in cs, I can say that a filtering functionality is not going to add much in the way of bloat. Well has most certainly hit on a lot of very important and valid points. It’s not like the app has to load in all of its features into memory at once ( duh) So what’s wrong with adding more? Especially with features like this which are so small. How much bloat will that add to the app? A few subroutines? Maybe a library dependency? If you’re really concerned about bloat that minute, don’t use OS X as you’ll find many common apps far, far, far too bloated for your taste.Įven on top of that, what’s wrong with people asking for more features from TotalFinder? Isn’t it already aspiring to become like PathFinder, etc.? I mean, again, all these sorts of apps are doing anyway is just adding on a random, nice mish-mash of things to the existing Finder app. On top of that, we’re just talking about a filtering feature for crap’s sake. ![]() Which is not to say that’s a bad thing, as the Unix philosophy is not always a good rule to adhere to. It’s not like TotalFinder, PathFinder, or what have you are particularly good at one thing and one thing only. You’re sitting there preaching about the Unix philosophy regarding an app whose sole purpose is really to just extend another app with various, rather unrelated features. Wtf? Sorry pal, but your arguments make no sense on so many levels there. Today it’s search feature, tomorrow it’s file compare, next day it’s folder syncing… My humble opinion. I realize people feel that their one feature request is hardly the ‘kitchen sink’, but my point is, where do you draw the line. I would not want TF to become the new ‘kitchen sink’ finder replacement. As reidrik.von pointed out, there are other apps that SPECIALIZE in searching, and other apps that specialize in FTP, and file compare, and folder synching, and so on. I believe if you polled most TF users they would agree, keep it light, just make sure what it does, it does well and without bugs. I want TF to remain light and fast and focus on the main reason I use it, dual pane side by side display, with a few extras like color sidebar thrown in. ![]() If I wanted Forklift or PathFinder, I’d being using it, not TF. ![]() TF starts doing this and next thing you know you are headed down the path (pun intended) to being PathFinder want a be, or Forklift. Other people feel strongly that TF should support FTP/webDAV/, folder synching, file compare and cloud access and on and on. Adding that into TF would probably increase its size and complexity many times over. Search features are not simple there is a lot that goes into it behind the scenes. Some developers fall into the trap of wanting to please everyone and begin adding these features, and what was once a small, fast, app that specialized in one thing and did it well, becomes heavier, bloated mess with a mish-mash of features. It seems whenever an app becomes successful at doing one or a few things, people start wanting to add this or that feature, and of course every person feels the feature on their ‘want’ list is the most important. ![]() Although I understand the usefulness of this, I respectfully disagree that it should be added to TF. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |