Work with Apple to integrate PF into OS X!

[Anonymous]

I think path finder is deffinitely better than finder. The problem is that it doesnt get rid of the finder. So basically your still running 2 unless the user quits finder. What I have read in this forum so far, is that if u do replace path finder over finder it startes to create problems. I hope developers can fix that. Path Finder should make a deal with apple to set up path finder on the new apple's. The easier the interface can be, the better apple will become.
I have not used path finder, but only a couple of times, and I hope it can FULLY replace the finder!!!!!!!!!!
Good luck to the developers. I wish I had those skills, I need to study it.

[Anonymous]

Look at it this way.

"There was Konfabulator and now there is Dashboard on tiger."

[Catfish_Man]

Konfabulator isn't related to Dashboard at all except in concept. Also, Apple is highly unlikely to include PathFinder as part of the system. It's much more likely that they'd rewrite the existing Finder.

[amm0409]

Catfish_Man
How can you say konfabulator is not related to Dashboard? The only thing you could tell me that is different is that they both have different names, you can easily hide the widgets in Dashboard with two keys or one. There is also that bubble effect used by dashboard. Essentially they are Alike. Apple could make something else which is LIKE Pathfinder. In my mind Path Finder is better because it allows more access to things just in the window.

[Catfish_Man]

What I was saying is that technologically they're very different. In concept they're both a modern reimplementation of the desk accessories that existed in the original MacOS. Similarly, PathFinder and the OSX Finder are both modern reimplementations of the MacOS Finder with new ideas. I think that rather than making a deal with CocoaTech, Apple would be far more likely to do what they did with Konfabulator and develop their own next generation Finder.

[amm0409]

catfish_man
Ok, you said it better.
I need to get another computer or another hardrive so I can test using the path finder as the finder on OS X. Have you tried doing that, if so have you had any problems?

[jacobolus]

Check this link:
https://jobs.apple.com/cgi-bin/WebObjects/Employment.woa/wa/jobDescription?RequisitionID=2510614

PathFinder team, you should apply!

[grotsasha]

It seems that they want to maintain Finder as Carbon app (they say C++ knowledge required). They don't want to rewrite it, a pity. I feel that we are not going to have a better Finder :? ... At least surely not the "best file browser on this planet"... How arrogant they are at Apple, really...

[fcharron]

Yeah, noticed that job posting earlier too.

I assume this would be for Leopard that should come out late 2006.

Really weird they're still going for a Carbon based Finder.
We'll have to wait and see :-)

.:FLC:.

[maersk]

please PLEASE pathfinder team apply...........

for the love of god..... apply

[CrimsonMonk]

Oh, and Neilio, you guys are getting lots of attention over at TUAW. Something about nominations for being an apple software engineer... :D
http://www.tuaw.com/2006/01/26/apple-seeking-a-finder-software-engineer/

[Sydde]

Oh, and Neilio, you guys are getting lots of attention over at TUAW. Something about nominations for being an apple software engineer... :D
http://www.tuaw.com/2006/01/26/apple-seeking-a-finder-software-engineer/
develop Finder into the best file browser on the planet

So it that how one would describe PF? I think of it more as a file maintenance and system access tool than as a browser. If Finder is expected to be little more than a browser, no wonder the FTFF acronym pops up so much.

[neilio]

Steve pretty much already said it's a no go. The position Apple is looking to fill is for a Carbon programmer, which leads to the conclusion that the new Finder in 10.5 will still be carbon-based.

This actually sucks hard, because I've been hoping that if Apple rewrote the Finder as a Cocoa application, they'd take the time fix all of the outstanding issues that Cocoa has (especially Applescript support). It doesn't look like that's going to happen, sadly.

[fcharron]

But what I don't get, is why are they sticking with carbon?

[grotsasha]

Lazy...
No... Here is what I think and imagine (of course with absolutely no information from any close sources):

I'm sure somebody at the top of Apple has already all his new ideas about Finder ready and will not argue about them with programmers who will write the code... "Just do what I've told..." AND I have a strong feeling that this somebody thinks that Finder is already the "best file browser on this planet"...
I know that a plan of features for an application is a sort of a defined list, that serves like a contract (don't remember the appropriate name) and I think that this list for Finder was made by somebody who is not a programmer. And I suppose they want to leave a... senior and experienced programmer at the top of Finder programming project, because "he is doing fantastic job, etc." and he's a Carbon developer...(and this guy will be the first to say Finder should be left Carbon) They just want one eh... young programmer, new to Apple, who will maybe create some fresh details and will work hard on his new post, but will be surely governed by someone else (this experienced Carbon guy, I suppose). I think that whoever obtains this new post, whatever brilliant he is, he will only be doing black and hard job and nobody will ask his opinion... And they surely want to reduce costs. Why create a new Cocoa departement, or whatever, when we need just a bit of fresh creative wind to polish what we have?