Alternative/competition ? : Filerun [Archive]

View Full Version : Alternative/competition ? : Filerun

fcharron

Jan 05, 2006, 05:30 AM

Some people are starting to talk about a coming app that is apparently similar to PF: FileRun. Instead of having everybody giving their opinions on it in the ever-so-popular "Wake me when 4.0 shows up" thread, which is intended to be about PF4, let's discuss FileRun here.

paul.michael.bauer

Jan 05, 2006, 07:37 AM

Filerun will be available 'sometime' in February.
More screen shots comming soon.
Hey! At least you can download an icon. *ducks*

macsterdam

Jan 05, 2006, 07:46 AM

It's difficult to judge this program on just one screenshot, but it does look nice. Plus, I've been told it will have tabs as well (eventually). Tabs is what I look forward the most, really, that and speed! Both FileRun and PF4 look exciting, plus, competition is good :D

stardog2000

Jan 05, 2006, 07:54 AM

Not much to go on as yet. I don't see a drop stack - very important for me. I would miss the column view but perhaps it is available in some way (collapse the preview info part of the window). The trash in the "sidebar" is kind of nice (does anyone drag to the trash anymore?) the History menu seems a good idea. Speed is an issue for me. Won't know until we try it. Overall, the UI looks clean & simple - pretty nice

The competition for Pathfinder will be good. Supports by the developers in lieu of some lost trust by Cocoatech will be another issue. I've used Pathfinder since the Snax days but I'm not a commited loyalist. If someone does them one better I'm willing to switch

fcharron

Jan 05, 2006, 08:09 AM

First of all, I strongly believe that PF4 will be out before FileRun. With PF4 most likely coming out within a few weeks, FileRun's estimated release date of February is too late to beat PF4.

Given the minimal info we have available on FileRun, I'm not going to comment on it now and will wait for further info.

I am curious though.

hotmac

Jan 05, 2006, 08:17 AM

Lawrance Oak

Jan 05, 2006, 09:15 AM

Where does it say it will support Tabs? If it does that I would truely look a little more into this. I do alot of FTP all day long. So the ability to do that too inside of the program would be very helpful. But then this program would have to be better then Trasmit, which on its own is a very solid program.

neilio

Jan 05, 2006, 10:01 AM

I'm really curious to see what this is like, too. Obviously we've got a bit of a head start on them, but it will be really neat to see just how far along this will be when it's released.

Knowing what I know now about Cocoa development and file browser development in particular, it's a very, very tough road to hoe, so it will be interesting to see just how polished FileRun is when it's out. I'm especially interested to see how they've worked around the many Cocoa bugs there are in file moving and handling.

That is, assuming it's Cocoa and not Carbon. :)

Does anyone know if this is more than one developer?

macsterdam

Jan 05, 2006, 10:17 AM

Mocenigo

Jan 05, 2006, 10:45 AM

IMHO, one important aspect of file browsers is that the UI must be as clean as possible.

This is in fact one of the few GOOD aspects of the current Finder. PathFinder 3 is a bit cluttered: there are too many drawers - I do not really see the need for a terminal drawer, for example - and definitely drawers for previews or for favorites are a wrong choice (it is a COMMON operation, according to the Apple HIG hence should not go into a drawer) - they seem to be fixed in the new, upcoming PF.
Still, PathFinder 3.x was a good product that had some interesting aspects and was worth the price.

In my opinion, also (text) file editing does not belong to the file browser. PF's developers should avoid bloat. I am curious (and a bit suspicious) about the "preview" pane at the bottom of the window in the pf4 screenshot.

On the other hand, integrated support for ftp, ftp/tsl and sftp is a *must* for an improved finder. Apple Finder's lousy support for these protocols is inexcusable: kde's desktop allows access to basically anything in a much nicer way. It would be great to have cyberduck-like functionality directly in the Finder (replacement).

The fact that some aspects are being integrated into more customisable sidebars and that the preview is now in a column (in PF4) is a great bonus, and tabs are great too, that's why I am excited and cannot wait it will finally be released. Path Finder has also a nicer, leaner way of displaying the absolute paths than FileRun - the latter take too much space. I also hope that in Path Finder 4 one can decide whether to display the drop stack or not (I do not use that feature).

FileRun does not seem clean. I got the impression that there is just too much information on the disks in the sidebar, and the preview/info bars
on the right are too big. I like the Automator-inspired look, though.

So I have the feeling that PF4 will be a nicer product than FileRun - a streamlined PF with infos in a COLUMN and not in a drawer, and tabs, is already a great improvement - but of course we are also speaking of a product at major release version 4 against a new release. Competition will be nice, and I hope that this student from Germany will have more time to devote to his products than iScroll2's author - apparently he had to abandon his project in a (stable, reliable, solid) state.

mgrimes

Jan 05, 2006, 11:02 AM

I'm sure FileRun will not compare feature-wise with PF4, but comparing the screenshots, there's no contest that FileRun feels more like an Apple app or what Finder should be. Lacking a drop stack is a show stopper for me -- i'd just as soon run Finder. I am in full agreement while PF is hot, there should be some serious consideration to uncluttered UI design that fits the Mac OS X mold.

To be honest, dropping the HIG as a place PF should go or not go is not good advice. If you know what you're doing you can break the HIG all over the place and come out on top.

A good example is David Watanabe's NewsFire... while I don't use it due to it's lack of features there is no doubt it makes sales based on the UI alone. Where NetNewsWire makes every effort to follow the HIG as much as possible, it feels dull and lifeless despite its rich base of features. Apple violates it's own HIG all the time -- Delicious Monster breaks a ton of HIG, yet wins design awards -- Quicksilver breaks pretty much the entire HIG, but yet it is the ideal interface for what it does.

A lot of HIG is about common sense -- like NOT putting Mail's mailboxes in a drawer (circa Panther) -- that was entirely stupid as you need to get at mailboxes on a regular basis. But I don't need an Apple document to tell me that's poor interface design. UIs are easy to criticize if you actually use the target application. The hard part is staring at the blank nib and getting started.

neilio

Jan 05, 2006, 03:31 PM

Yeah, as Apple has so aptly shown with their own releases, the HIGs aren't hard and fast rules, but recommendations. Design guidelines need to be "living" and adaptable to innovation; something that the HIG hasn't been up to this point. I wonder what was the last time Apple updated them?

The reality is that UI design, especially UI design on the Mac, follows trends. So a good application adapts and updates with what is the current "expected" look. All you need to do is compare what Mac OS X 10.0 applications looked like compared to applications built for Tiger - the changes aren't drastic, but the older applications still stick out like sore thumbs.

Addressing the "bloat" that some people complain about in PF is an ongoing process. I personally think it's a combination of better UI design plus establishing new expectations. People don't complain when their graphics programs have a zillion features (look at Photoshop, Illustrator, or Fireworks) - new ways of accomplishing tasks are welcome. To me this is the same basic concept that Path Finder stems from - the "bloat" doesn't affect application speed*, so as long as the application is well-designed, the extra features shouldn't be an issue.

The text editing features in PF might not be useful to you, but we have a lot of users who love 'em... so one person's bloat is another person's benefit.

* The major thing that has affected PF's speed more than anything was issues with Cocoa - most of which have been addressed in 10.4.

All of this said, we have lots of ideas on how to make Path Finder more appealing to people who crave a more streamlined application, as well as those who want the kitchen sink. A part of PF4's prolonged development was rebuilding PF so that accommodating this and many other features would be much, much easier.

Neil

mattmon

Jan 05, 2006, 05:32 PM

I really encourage innovation, and to date PathFinder has shown just that. But at some point (not neccesarily now) it can be considered feature bloat. I'd like to see an open plug-in implementation that would allow users to pick and choose features, and would allow other developers to extend the interface beyond what a single developer can reasonably accomplish.

Mocenigo

Jan 06, 2006, 03:38 AM

Yeah, as Apple has so aptly shown with their own releases, the HIGs aren't hard and fast rules, but recommendations.

Of course, but i was pointing in particular at one aspect: Drawers are for features that are rarely used. That's why i welcome the extended sidebars and the column preview. Then, there are many other aspect that can be fiddled with causing UI nightmares.

The reality is that UI design, especially UI design on the Mac, follows trends. So a good application adapts and updates with what is the current "expected" look. All you need to do is compare what Mac OS X 10.0 applications looked like compared to applications built for Tiger - the changes aren't drastic, but the older applications still stick out like sore thumbs.

full ack.

Addressing the "bloat" (...) To me this is the same basic concept that Path Finder stems from - the "bloat" doesn't affect application speed*, so as long as the application is well-designed, the extra features shouldn't be an issue.

As long as the UI remains clean, then it is ok for a file browser.
Photoshop is a more specific app. A Finder (replacement) is the
way one interacts with the organisation of the data - it must be as clean as possible. I see a VERY good trend in the PF4 UI.

keep up the good work!

Roberto

Darkshadow

Jan 06, 2006, 06:26 AM

I wonder what was the last time Apple updated them?

According to the revision history (http://developer.apple.com/documentation/UserExperience/Conceptual/OSXHIGuidelines/XHIGRevisionHistory/chapter_999_section_1.html#//apple_ref/doc/uid/TP40002726-TP1), it was last updated on Dec 6th (2005). Though I doubt the changes are full on changes, which is probably what you were really getting after.

(As a side note, Neil, I think you guys should put "Made minor bug fixes." in the version history for PF4 :D ;))

One of my apps breaks just about every guideline, but works for it, so I'm in the camp that they're more suggestions rather than hard and fast rules.

Lawrance Oak

Jan 06, 2006, 07:54 AM

I am glad to see that you guys who are making PF 4 are thinking outside of the box. I use photoshop every single day. Love to find new ways to do something that I did before but faster or just another way of doing it.

I am excited for this program to come out and glad I decided to sign up for the forums!! I love the fact that there is actually someone out there that really does look at these and replies back from Cocoatech!! Wish Apple would do the samething!!

jdguilty

Jan 06, 2006, 10:04 AM

What about Macintosh Explorer by Rage Software http://www.ragesw.com/products/explorer.html? Anyone have a take on the quality of their product?

macsterdam

Jan 06, 2006, 10:16 AM

It works ok, has some ok features, reasonably fast but it most definitely does not feel like an Mac application. I know that sounds a bit vague, but it's the best I can do.

paul.michael.bauer

Jan 06, 2006, 10:30 AM

Has anyone used DiskOrder? http://www.likemac.ru/english/
It has a built-in FTP client, but is missing many of the advanced features in PF.

The one thing it has going for it the dual panes;
I 'switched' this summer and the only thing I REALLY miss from the Windows world is xplorer2 and its dual & scrap pane goodness.

Anonymous

Jan 06, 2006, 10:34 AM

I tested it once because for me Windows Explorer has one advantage over the Finder: the two pane view. If you are used to it, it allows pretty efficient file management, certainly faster than with Finder. But it just did not have the look-and-feel of a Mac app (at least in the previous version simply too big and ugly buttons).

Than i discovered Path Finder which combines the possibility of a two pane system with so mich more 8)

Lawrance Oak

Jan 10, 2006, 06:19 AM

What about Macintosh Explorer by Rage Software http://www.ragesw.com/products/explorer.html? Anyone have a take on the quality of their product?

I am going to test this program out for the next week, aka my Tab Browsing fix for the week. I will give some pros and cons that I find about using this program.

kuro

Jan 10, 2006, 11:05 AM

Just wanted to let people who are following this thread know, on the front page, there is a blog link where Steve posted:

January 09, 2006

Path Finder 4 is done and will be released in a few days.

He goes on to say more, but I'll let you read it yourselves :)

Happy day!

Lawrance Oak

Jan 10, 2006, 01:43 PM

jdguilty

Jan 10, 2006, 02:28 PM

Lawrance Oak wrote:

where??

Click on the "Cocoatech Weblog" link on the Cocoatech home page.

Lawrance Oak

Jan 11, 2006, 06:50 AM

ahh yeah!!!! I tried that new program used it for 2hours what a POS!!!

Jan 11, 2006, 10:40 PM

Whaat I ran before PathFinder/SNAX (anyone still remember its name?) is RBrowser. It's the NeXT's Workspace Manager. While it matches feature-wise to Workspace Manager quite closely, it doesn't have the contemporary Aqua-ish touch and has received little UI improvement. (For instance, the automounted disk image is not show on a shelf like Finder/PathFinder. You have to navigate to the /Volume directory to access the new disk.)

Take a look at www.rbrowser.com

grotsasha

Feb 01, 2006, 11:45 AM

This topic is a bit forgotten. Don't want to make publicity for another programm, but just wanted to check if it's accidentally released (i.e. 1st of February today).
It'll be out on 27th of February and the developer posted some additional details and screen shots. Looks very serious.
http://filerun.info/

fcharron

Feb 01, 2006, 12:10 PM

Still don't see tabs...

macsterdam

Feb 01, 2006, 12:24 PM

It will most definitely have tabs, but they may not make it into it's initial release.

grotsasha

Feb 01, 2006, 12:50 PM

For me it's useless without Drop Stack.

macsterdam

Feb 01, 2006, 02:59 PM

To early to make any real judgments, don't you think. It's not even out yet.

kofasetic

Feb 01, 2006, 04:03 PM

For me it's useless without Drop Stack.

The developer will not have a "drop stack" in his program. He doesn't want to copy features from PF4 but will offer other innovative features. Well maybe he'll have a different name for it. He doesn't have specifics but I am anxious for the release.

Feb 01, 2006, 04:10 PM

JohnB79

Feb 26, 2006, 07:36 PM

I've been looing to give file run a once over when it came out tomorrow but its been since pushed back to 3/17 for whatever reason... the dev gives no info... I thought it was funny...

kofasetic

Feb 27, 2006, 08:23 AM

I've been looing to give file run a once over when it came out tomorrow but its been since pushed back to 3/17 for whatever reason... the dev gives no info... I thought it was funny...

This was his reason:

i'm sorry, but i have to postpone the release of FileRun 1.0. There are two reasons:

First, i'm not satisfied with the beta version of FileRun. It's fast and the powerful features work well, but it's not perfect. There are also some bugs and i need some time to correct them. I don't want to deliver a buggy application. I hope you understand that.

Second, i received so many mails with great feature requests. Thank you! I decided to include some of these features already in version 1.0. I just need some time to finish them. But i'm sure you'll like them. At this moment, i just want to name two things: Tabs and Smart Copy.

The new release date is March 17th.
http://filerun.info/

grotsasha

Feb 27, 2006, 09:10 AM

Looks like the guy is responsible and he's going to fight his way through. Good luck for him!

macsterdam

Feb 27, 2006, 09:21 AM

I wouldn't be suprised if 'tabs' make it in the initial release after all :) Best of luck to him with this project. He's up against some amazing competition!

grotsasha

Feb 27, 2006, 10:36 AM

Best of luck to him with this project. He's up against some amazing competition!

Yeah... Absolutely!

I wanted to add that I'm a bit familiar with the atmosphere on the faculties of informatics in German universities. That's damn theoretical from one side, and from the other side programming itself is not the center point (yes :!: ). Design, theory and a manager carreer in mind, or something like that. The idea is that programmers are just black workers... Of course that's my own vision of things, but I noticed what I noticed...

Well, the guy seems to be fed up with this and that's perfect! The best reaction one can have in my opinion.

grotsasha

Mar 16, 2006, 11:56 PM

Well, the story seems to repeat the PF4 release wait:

Coming soon!
FileRun will be available soon! I'm currently implementing tabs and updating the interface to a layout with less frames. This (http://filerun.info/images/filerun_march_16.png) is how FileRun looks at the moment. There are also some tests needed on Intel Macs (FileRun will be Universal Binary right from the start). Thanks for your patience! - Maximilian.

bill

Mar 17, 2006, 06:46 AM

For me it's useless without Drop Stack.
There was a program I ran across about the same time I encountered Path Finder that was a floating drop stack for the Finder. I can't remember the name of it right off the top of my head (scratch that, a few mintues on macupdate and I found it: XShelf (http://www.macupdate.com/info.php/id/10996)). It worked alright when I first tried it (Jaguar/Panther), but I don't know if it'll work in Tiger, and I don't know if it'd work with FileRun. It hasn't been updated since 2003, though, which makes me wonder.

There are other programs out there that do the same thing (one, at least: DropZone (http://macupdate.com/info.php/id/17173)).

migueld

Feb 20, 2007, 05:35 PM

I don't see icon view nor pop-up folders. Everything seems to indicate this is a browser and will compete directly with pathfinder, which is really disheartening. When will new interfaces such as the bumptop prototype be considered?

The problem that I see with most of these 3rd party file managers, is that they are just that managers, browsers; they seem to neglect the most important type of workflow: isolated directories. They don't remember ANYTHING about a particular directory. List view options, such as which metadata to show on each directory is not remembered. Width, heights, spatial positions, etc are all global rather than specific to each directory.

When I work with illustrator/photoshop projects, I typically need my library folder, templates folder and the current project folder, and interaction among these. Pop-up folders were excellent for this. Browsers are not. Tabs are not. Browsers are for browsing not working IMHO.

Someday, someday.