Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.sys.mac.system > #110067 > unrolled thread

10.12 to 10.13 ?

Back to article view | Back to comp.sys.mac.system

Contents

  10.12 to 10.13 ? heron stone <heron@invalid.invalid> - 2017-11-15 20:04 -0800
    Re: 10.12 to 10.13 ? Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2017-11-16 05:17 +0000
    Re: 10.12 to 10.13 ? Mallocy <null@mail.mn> - 2017-11-16 08:02 +0000
      Re: 10.12 to 10.13 ? Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> - 2017-11-17 08:43 +1300
        Re: 10.12 to 10.13 ? ANTant@zimage.com (Ant) - 2017-11-17 18:20 -0600
          Re: 10.12 to 10.13 ? Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> - 2017-11-18 15:10 +1300
            Re: 10.12 to 10.13 ? Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2017-11-18 04:23 +0000
        Re: 10.12 to 10.13 ? nmassello@yahoo.com (Neill Massello) - 2017-11-17 22:28 -0700
          Re: 10.12 to 10.13 ? Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> - 2017-11-18 19:20 +1300
            Re: 10.12 to 10.13 ? Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2017-11-19 04:12 +0000
              Re: 10.12 to 10.13 ? nmassello@yahoo.com (Neill Massello) - 2017-11-18 22:42 -0700
              Re: 10.12 to 10.13 ? Alan Browne <alan.browne@freelunchvideotron.ca> - 2017-11-19 12:01 -0500
                Re: 10.12 to 10.13 ? android <here@there.was> - 2017-11-19 18:33 +0100
                Re: 10.12 to 10.13 ? nmassello@yahoo.com (Neill Massello) - 2017-11-19 10:38 -0700
                  Re: 10.12 to 10.13 ? Alan Browne <alan.browne@freelunchvideotron.ca> - 2017-11-19 16:48 -0500
                Re: 10.12 to 10.13 ? Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2017-11-19 18:49 +0000
                  Re: 10.12 to 10.13 ? Alan Browne <alan.browne@freelunchvideotron.ca> - 2017-11-19 15:06 -0500
                    Re: 10.12 to 10.13 ? Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2017-11-20 03:02 +0000
                      Re: 10.12 to 10.13 ? Alan Browne <alan.browne@freelunchvideotron.ca> - 2017-11-20 12:58 -0500
                        Re: 10.12 to 10.13 ? Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2017-11-20 20:28 +0000
                          Re: 10.12 to 10.13 ? Alan Browne <alan.browne@freelunchvideotron.ca> - 2017-11-20 17:31 -0500
                Re: 10.12 to 10.13 ? Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2017-11-19 19:03 +0000
                  Re: 10.12 to 10.13 ? Alan Browne <alan.browne@freelunchvideotron.ca> - 2017-11-19 15:06 -0500
                    Re: 10.12 to 10.13 ? Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2017-11-20 06:58 +0000
                      Re: 10.12 to 10.13 ? Alan Browne <alan.browne@freelunchvideotron.ca> - 2017-11-20 12:59 -0500
                        Re: 10.12 to 10.13 ? Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2017-11-20 20:24 +0000
                          Re: 10.12 to 10.13 ? Alan Browne <alan.browne@freelunchvideotron.ca> - 2017-11-20 17:29 -0500
                Re: 10.12 to 10.13 ? Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> - 2017-11-20 09:19 +1300
                  Re: 10.12 to 10.13 ? Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2017-11-20 03:02 +0000
                    Re: 10.12 to 10.13 ? Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2017-11-20 06:59 +0000
          Re: 10.12 to 10.13 ? nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2017-11-18 09:25 -0500
    Re: 10.12 to 10.13 ? nj_kruse@me.com (Niels Jørgen Kruse) - 2017-11-16 11:01 +0100
      Re: 10.12 to 10.13 ? Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2017-11-16 18:22 +0000
        Re: 10.12 to 10.13 ? Mallocy <null@mail.mn> - 2017-11-17 11:18 +0000
    Re: 10.12 to 10.13 ? nmassello@yahoo.com (Neill Massello) - 2017-11-17 13:11 -0700
      Re: 10.12 to 10.13 ? dempson@actrix.gen.nz (David Empson) - 2017-11-18 12:25 +1300
      Re: 10.12 to 10.13 ? ANTant@zimage.com (Ant) - 2017-11-17 18:22 -0600
        Re: 10.12 to 10.13 ? Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2017-11-18 04:26 +0000

Page 1 of 2  [1] 2  Next page →

#110067 — 10.12 to 10.13 ?

is there any really significant advantage
for me to install 10.13

i'm pretty sure that most of the apps i depend on
work with high sierra

i was concerned about the new file system but
since i have all hard drives and the internal
fusion drive, i guess i don't have to deal with it

is there any reason NOT to upgrade


10.12.6 (16G1036)
iMac (Retina 5K, 27-inch, Late 2014)
4 GHz Intel Core i7
24 GB 1600 MHz DDR3
AMD Radeon R9 M295X 4096 MB


thanks

heron

-- 
unDO email address
___
Nature,                                                 heron stone
  to be commanded,                                http://gendo.net
         must be obeyed.                 mailto:heronDO@gendo.net

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#110068

In message <151120172004522586%heron@invalid.invalid> heron stone <heron@invalid.invalid> wrote:
> is there any reason NOT to upgrade

Nope.

-- 
Sometimes the only thing you could do for people was to be there. --Soul
Music

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#110071

On 2017-11-16, heron stone <heron@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>
> is there any really significant advantage
> for me to install 10.13
>
> i'm pretty sure that most of the apps i depend on
> work with high sierra
>
> i was concerned about the new file system but
> since i have all hard drives and the internal
> fusion drive, i guess i don't have to deal with it
>
> is there any reason NOT to upgrade
>
>
> 10.12.6 (16G1036)
> iMac (Retina 5K, 27-inch, Late 2014)
> 4 GHz Intel Core i7
> 24 GB 1600 MHz DDR3
> AMD Radeon R9 M295X 4096 MB
>
>
> thanks
>
> heron
>

no: best MacOS yet

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#110077

On 2017-11-16 08:02:45 +0000, Mallocy said:
> On 2017-11-16, heron stone <heron@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>> 
>> is there any really significant advantage
>> for me to install 10.13
>> 
>> i'm pretty sure that most of the apps i depend on
>> work with high sierra
>> 
>> i was concerned about the new file system but
>> since i have all hard drives and the internal
>> fusion drive, i guess i don't have to deal with it
>> 
>> is there any reason NOT to upgrade
>> 
>> 10.12.6 (16G1036)
>> iMac (Retina 5K, 27-inch, Late 2014)
>> 4 GHz Intel Core i7
>> 24 GB 1600 MHz DDR3
>> AMD Radeon R9 M295X 4096 MB
> 
> no: best MacOS yet

That would be MacOS 9.  :-p

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#110093

Your Name <YourName@yourisp.com> wrote:
> On 2017-11-16 08:02:45 +0000, Mallocy said:
> > On 2017-11-16, heron stone <heron@invalid.invalid> wrote:
> >> 
> >> is there any really significant advantage
> >> for me to install 10.13
> >> 
> >> i'm pretty sure that most of the apps i depend on
> >> work with high sierra
> >> 
> >> i was concerned about the new file system but
> >> since i have all hard drives and the internal
> >> fusion drive, i guess i don't have to deal with it
> >> 
> >> is there any reason NOT to upgrade
> >> 
> >> 10.12.6 (16G1036)
> >> iMac (Retina 5K, 27-inch, Late 2014)
> >> 4 GHz Intel Core i7
> >> 24 GB 1600 MHz DDR3
> >> AMD Radeon R9 M295X 4096 MB
> > 
> > no: best MacOS yet

> That would be MacOS 9.  :-p

Bah. Mac OS Xes were better.
-- 
Quote of the Week: "I go out of my way to avoid stepping on ants." --Terry McGovern, daughter of Senator George and Eleanor McGovern, subject of the book "Terry by her father"
Note: A fixed width font (Courier, Monospace, etc.) is required to see this signature correctly.
  /\___/\          Ant(Dude) @ http://antfarm.ma.cx (Personal Web Site)
 / /\ /\ \                 Ant's Quality Foraged Links: http://aqfl.net
| |o   o| |
   \ _ /    Please nuke ANT if replying by e-mail privately. If credit-
    ( )     ing, then please kindly use Ant nickname and AQFL URL/link.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#110095

On 2017-11-18 00:20:01 +0000, Ant said:
> Your Name <YourName@yourisp.com> wrote:
>> On 2017-11-16 08:02:45 +0000, Mallocy said:
>>> On 2017-11-16, heron stone <heron@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>> is there any really significant advantage
>>>> for me to install 10.13
>>>> 
>>>> i'm pretty sure that most of the apps i depend on
>>>> work with high sierra
>>>> 
>>>> i was concerned about the new file system but
>>>> since i have all hard drives and the internal
>>>> fusion drive, i guess i don't have to deal with it
>>>> 
>>>> is there any reason NOT to upgrade
>>>> 
>>>> 10.12.6 (16G1036)
>>>> iMac (Retina 5K, 27-inch, Late 2014)
>>>> 4 GHz Intel Core i7
>>>> 24 GB 1600 MHz DDR3
>>>> AMD Radeon R9 M295X 4096 MB
>>> 
>>> no: best MacOS yet
>> 
>> That would be MacOS 9.  :-p
> 
> Bah. Mac OS Xes were better.

Nope. Early versions of OS X were horrible, buggy, and lacked features 
already in OS 9. It has slowly gotten better, but it's still not as 
good as OS 9, mainly due to Apple keep fiddling about with unnecessary 
toys and gimmicks, rather than making the OS work properly ... not to 
mention Ive's ridiculous obession with making everything flat and 
toy-like. :-(

There are quirky bugs in Sierra that have been around for many versions 
(sometimes the disk eject triangle appears in a Finder sidebar, 
sometimes it doesn't).

There's also the issue that newer versions of OS X seem to be much 
slower at some things than the earlier OSes (ejecting a "disk" often 
takes ages in Sierra, but in OS 9 it was almost much quicker).

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#110098

On 2017-11-18, Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> wrote:
> On 2017-11-18 00:20:01 +0000, Ant said:
>> Your Name <YourName@yourisp.com> wrote:
>>> On 2017-11-16 08:02:45 +0000, Mallocy said:
>>>> On 2017-11-16, heron stone <heron@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>>>>> 
>>>>> is there any really significant advantage
>>>>> for me to install 10.13
>>>>> 
>>>>> i'm pretty sure that most of the apps i depend on
>>>>> work with high sierra
>>>>> 
>>>>> i was concerned about the new file system but
>>>>> since i have all hard drives and the internal
>>>>> fusion drive, i guess i don't have to deal with it
>>>>> 
>>>>> is there any reason NOT to upgrade
>>>>> 
>>>>> 10.12.6 (16G1036)
>>>>> iMac (Retina 5K, 27-inch, Late 2014)
>>>>> 4 GHz Intel Core i7
>>>>> 24 GB 1600 MHz DDR3
>>>>> AMD Radeon R9 M295X 4096 MB
>>>> 
>>>> no: best MacOS yet
>>> 
>>> That would be MacOS 9.  :-p
>> 
>> Bah. Mac OS Xes were better.
>
> Nope.

Yep.

Since we now have two representatives of two diametrically opposing
views, I'll consider this discussion over. Last word freaks feel free to
respond.

-- 
E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my ravenous SPAM filter.
I often ignore posts from Google. Use a real news client instead.

JR

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#110101

Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> wrote:

> On 2017-11-16 08:02:45 +0000, Mallocy said:
> > 
> > no: best MacOS yet
> 
> That would be MacOS 9.  :-p

My memory is that 10.3 was the point at which I felt that OS X had
reached feature and usability parity with OS 9 -- with much greater
stability, of course. But I do occasionally long for the days when every
Finder folder had its own window. 

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#110102

On 2017-11-18 05:28:07 +0000, Neill Massello said:
> Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> wrote:
>> On 2017-11-16 08:02:45 +0000, Mallocy said:
>>> 
>>> no: best MacOS yet
>> 
>> That would be MacOS 9.  :-p
> 
> My memory is that 10.3 was the point at which I felt that OS X had
> reached feature and usability parity with OS 9 -- with much greater
> stability, of course. But I do occasionally long for the days when every
> Finder folder had its own window.

Folders can have their own window in the OS X Finder, under Sierra (I 
don't know when the feature was added or if it's been in every version).

  - In the Finder, go to Finder > Preferences

  - In the General section, turn OFF the option for
    "open folders in tabs instead of windows"
    at the bottom.

  - From now on you can open a folder in a window,
    then hold down the Command key when opening a
    sub-folder OR right-click on a sub-folder and
    choose "Open in New Window". Either way the
    sub-folder will open in a separate window,
    leaving the original folder window still open.

If you prefer to keep tabbed Finder windows, then you can use the same 
Command-double-click or right-click to open the sub-folder in a new 
tab, and than drag that tab out into a separate window.

:-)

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#110115

In message <ouojg2$164q$1@gioia.aioe.org> Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> wrote:
> On 2017-11-18 05:28:07 +0000, Neill Massello said:
>> Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> wrote:
>>> On 2017-11-16 08:02:45 +0000, Mallocy said:
>>>> 
>>>> no: best MacOS yet
>>> 
>>> That would be MacOS 9.  :-p
>> 
>> My memory is that 10.3 was the point at which I felt that OS X had
>> reached feature and usability parity with OS 9 -- with much greater
>> stability, of course. But I do occasionally long for the days when every
>> Finder folder had its own window.

> Folders can have their own window in the OS X Finder

Nope, they cannot. Never have been able to in OS X and still can't in
macOS.

>   - In the Finder, go to Finder > Preferences

>   - In the General section, turn OFF the option for
>     "open folders in tabs instead of windows"
>     at the bottom.

That is that what is being discussed. In macOS 9 and before, opening a
folder opened a window. You could not open the folder AGAIN and get a
different window.

In OS X I can have a my Documents folder opened in multiple windows (for
example, I often do this with one sorted by name and on sorted by date).


-- 
'The gods,' he said. 'Imprisoned in a thought. And perhaps they were
never more than a dream.' --Sourcery

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#110117

Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> wrote:

> In OS X I can have a my Documents folder opened in multiple windows (for
> example, I often do this with one sorted by name and on sorted by date).

Yes, the new way (with generic browser windows) is more flexible. It
just doesn't give you Classic's feel for where you are among your data.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#110119

On 2017-11-18 23:12, Lewis wrote:

>> Folders can have their own window in the OS X Finder
> 
> Nope, they cannot. Never have been able to in OS X and still can't in
> macOS.

What are you on about?  Finder is displayed in a window.  If that is at 
folder level, then it's a Finder window for that folder.

https://www.dropbox.com/s/dfcd54iaz428mjg/Screen%20Shot%202017-11-19%20at%2011.57.46.png

-- 
"My Twitter has become so powerful that
  I can actually make my enemies tell the truth."
..Donald Trump

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#110121

In article <J6WdnVS9ZNRwJYzHnZ2dnUU7-bvNnZ2d@giganews.com>,
 Alan Browne <alan.browne@freelunchvideotron.ca> wrote:

> "My Twitter has become so powerful that
>   I can actually make my enemies tell the truth."
> ..Donald Trump

Fake truth... Moi!
-- 
teleportation kills

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#110122

Alan Browne <alan.browne@freelunchvideotron.ca> wrote:

> What are you on about?  Finder is displayed in a window.  If that is at
> folder level, then it's a Finder window for that folder.

When did you start using Macs? 

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#110133

On 2017-11-19 12:38, Neill Massello wrote:
> Alan Browne <alan.browne@freelunchvideotron.ca> wrote:
> 
>> What are you on about?  Finder is displayed in a window.  If that is at
>> folder level, then it's a Finder window for that folder.
> 
> When did you start using Macs?

2008.  Leopard (IIRC).  Don't bother further, JR's reply sufficed.

-- 
"My Twitter has become so powerful that
  I can actually make my enemies tell the truth."
..Donald Trump

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#110123

On 2017-11-19, Alan Browne <alan.browne@freelunchvideotron.ca> wrote:
> On 2017-11-18 23:12, Lewis wrote:
>
>>> Folders can have their own window in the OS X Finder
>> 
>> Nope, they cannot. Never have been able to in OS X and still can't in
>> macOS.
>
> What are you on about?

They are talking the fact that in classic Mac OS the Finder supported
spatial awareness due to the fact that users could rely on a one-to-one
relationship between a folder in the file system and the position, size,
view, and look of the resulting Finder window you would see when you
opened it. In modern versions of macOS, the Finder instead uses a
browser-based design which doesn't retain those spatial properties in a
way that users can count on. It is all explained well enough here:

<http://archive.arstechnica.com/paedia/f/finder/finder-3.htm>

[Is "on about" some special wanker colloquialism?]

-- 
E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my ravenous SPAM filter.
I often ignore posts from Google. Use a real news client instead.

JR

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#110127

On 2017-11-19 13:49, Jolly Roger wrote:
> On 2017-11-19, Alan Browne <alan.browne@freelunchvideotron.ca> wrote:
>> On 2017-11-18 23:12, Lewis wrote:
>>
>>>> Folders can have their own window in the OS X Finder
>>>
>>> Nope, they cannot. Never have been able to in OS X and still can't in
>>> macOS.
>>
>> What are you on about?
> 
> They are talking the fact that in classic Mac OS the Finder supported
> spatial awareness due to the fact that users could rely on a one-to-one
> relationship between a folder in the file system and the position, size,
> view, and look of the resulting Finder window you would see when you
> opened it. In modern versions of macOS, the Finder instead uses a
> browser-based design which doesn't retain those spatial properties in a
> way that users can count on. It is all explained well enough here:
> 
> <http://archive.arstechnica.com/paedia/f/finder/finder-3.htm>

Got it.  I do find Finder opening irritating on occasion.  I'm working 
on the main screen and need a Finder window ... that open on the side 
screen.  ... drag.  (Literally).

OTOH, if you open a Finder window, size it, open another it's the same 
size.  Makes occasional file management easier-ish.

> 
> [Is "on about" some special wanker colloquialism?]

Bit of a Brit influence but nothing to do with solo fun.

-- 
"My Twitter has become so powerful that
  I can actually make my enemies tell the truth."
..Donald Trump

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#110137

On 2017-11-19, Alan Browne <alan.browne@freelunchvideotron.ca> wrote:
> On 2017-11-19 13:49, Jolly Roger wrote:
>> On 2017-11-19, Alan Browne <alan.browne@freelunchvideotron.ca> wrote:
>>> On 2017-11-18 23:12, Lewis wrote:
>>>
>>>>> Folders can have their own window in the OS X Finder
>>>>
>>>> Nope, they cannot. Never have been able to in OS X and still can't in
>>>> macOS.
>>>
>>> What are you on about?
>> 
>> They are talking the fact that in classic Mac OS the Finder supported
>> spatial awareness due to the fact that users could rely on a one-to-one
>> relationship between a folder in the file system and the position, size,
>> view, and look of the resulting Finder window you would see when you
>> opened it. In modern versions of macOS, the Finder instead uses a
>> browser-based design which doesn't retain those spatial properties in a
>> way that users can count on. It is all explained well enough here:
>> 
>> <http://archive.arstechnica.com/paedia/f/finder/finder-3.htm>
>
> Got it.  I do find Finder opening irritating on occasion.  I'm working 
> on the main screen and need a Finder window ... that open on the side 
> screen.  ... drag.  (Literally).
>
> OTOH, if you open a Finder window, size it, open another it's the same 
> size.  Makes occasional file management easier-ish.

Not always, which is the point.

-- 
E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my ravenous SPAM filter.
I often ignore posts from Google. Use a real news client instead.

JR

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#110141

On 2017-11-19 22:02, Jolly Roger wrote:
> On 2017-11-19, Alan Browne <alan.browne@freelunchvideotron.ca> wrote:
>> On 2017-11-19 13:49, Jolly Roger wrote:
>>> On 2017-11-19, Alan Browne <alan.browne@freelunchvideotron.ca> wrote:
>>>> On 2017-11-18 23:12, Lewis wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>> Folders can have their own window in the OS X Finder
>>>>>
>>>>> Nope, they cannot. Never have been able to in OS X and still can't in
>>>>> macOS.
>>>>
>>>> What are you on about?
>>>
>>> They are talking the fact that in classic Mac OS the Finder supported
>>> spatial awareness due to the fact that users could rely on a one-to-one
>>> relationship between a folder in the file system and the position, size,
>>> view, and look of the resulting Finder window you would see when you
>>> opened it. In modern versions of macOS, the Finder instead uses a
>>> browser-based design which doesn't retain those spatial properties in a
>>> way that users can count on. It is all explained well enough here:
>>>
>>> <http://archive.arstechnica.com/paedia/f/finder/finder-3.htm>
>>
>> Got it.  I do find Finder opening irritating on occasion.  I'm working
>> on the main screen and need a Finder window ... that open on the side
>> screen.  ... drag.  (Literally).
>>
>> OTOH, if you open a Finder window, size it, open another it's the same
>> size.  Makes occasional file management easier-ish.
> 
> Not always, which is the point.

I just did it 5 times in a row.  Each time resized the new one.  Each 
time the new+ one was the size of the previous new (adjusted size) one.

Perhaps it doesn't do that after a long delay ...


-- 
"My Twitter has become so powerful that
  I can actually make my enemies tell the truth."
..Donald Trump

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#110146

On 2017-11-20, Alan Browne <alan.browne@freelunchvideotron.ca> wrote:
> On 2017-11-19 22:02, Jolly Roger wrote:
>> On 2017-11-19, Alan Browne <alan.browne@freelunchvideotron.ca> wrote:
>>> On 2017-11-19 13:49, Jolly Roger wrote:
>>>> On 2017-11-19, Alan Browne <alan.browne@freelunchvideotron.ca> wrote:
>>>>> On 2017-11-18 23:12, Lewis wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>> Folders can have their own window in the OS X Finder
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Nope, they cannot. Never have been able to in OS X and still
>>>>>> can't in macOS.
>>>>>
>>>>> What are you on about?
>>>>
>>>> They are talking the fact that in classic Mac OS the Finder
>>>> supported spatial awareness due to the fact that users could rely
>>>> on a one-to-one relationship between a folder in the file system
>>>> and the position, size, view, and look of the resulting Finder
>>>> window you would see when you opened it. In modern versions of
>>>> macOS, the Finder instead uses a browser-based design which doesn't
>>>> retain those spatial properties in a way that users can count on.
>>>> It is all explained well enough here:
>>>>
>>>> <http://archive.arstechnica.com/paedia/f/finder/finder-3.htm>
>>>
>>> Got it.  I do find Finder opening irritating on occasion.  I'm
>>> working on the main screen and need a Finder window ... that open on
>>> the side screen.  ... drag.  (Literally).
>>>
>>> OTOH, if you open a Finder window, size it, open another it's the
>>> same size.  Makes occasional file management easier-ish.
>> 
>> Not always, which is the point.
>
> I just did it 5 times in a row.

I have *way* better things to do than getting into a debate about facts
that are already documented elsewhere on the net.

-- 
E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my ravenous SPAM filter.
I often ignore posts from Google. Use a real news client instead.

JR

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

Page 1 of 2  [1] 2  Next page →

Back to top | Article view | comp.sys.mac.system

csiph-web