Hi Jacob, Well, what I usually do is load both the destination folder and originating folder into disk order then tab to the originating directory folder if not there already and highlight on the files or folders you want to move and hit f6. A dialogue box should pop up and follow on from there.
David Truong EMail and Messenger: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Skype: blindboxer1967-----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Jacob Schmude Sent: Wednesday, 10 December 2008 6:59 AM To: General discussions on all topics relating to the use of Mac OS X by theblind Subject: Re: Finder problems. Pleaze help! It certainly does look interesting, found it a few hours ago. One thing I can't figure out is how to use the move command, though. No matter what I highlight, be it file or folder, it's always dimmed and never works. Copy and duplicate always work. What's the secret for the move command? On Dec 9, 2008, at 15:55, David Truong wrote: > HI Jacob, > > Yes, disk order is a finder replacement. You can find out more > about it at: > http://likemac.ru/english/ > > It's not everyone's cuppa tea but I don't mind it. It works well > for me and > is very VO friendly. > > David Truong > > EMail and Messenger: > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Skype: blindboxer1967 > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Jacob Schmude > Sent: Wednesday, 10 December 2008 4:02 AM > To: General discussions on all topics relating to the use of Mac OS > X by > theblind > Subject: Re: Finder problems. Pleaze help! > > Agreed 100% about the cut and paste, that's elementary functionality > that should have never been left out. Guess I forgot to put that one > in my list of annoyances. Still, I love column view and I wish there > was a way in most other file managers to turn off the folders first. > Never did care for that. > What's disk order? I might have to give it a look. Is it a finder > replacement? > > > On Dec 9, 2008, at 12:55, David Truong wrote: > >> Hi Jacob, >> >> I don't use the folder treeviews in Windows explorer so I'll take >> your word >> for it on that one. But in finder there's no easy way to cut and >> paste, no >> real way to see your folders first and files last or the other way >> round >> meaning files first and then folders last. No really easy way to >> run a >> program with a hotkey, instead you have to navigate to an edit field >> then >> interact then type in your program you want to run etc. I grant it >> that >> Quick look is sort've handy I guess but more time than not it's a >> pain in >> the arse and I turn it off. But I praise finder for having that >> hotkey to >> turn it off and on. Windows explorer has this and more plus it's >> list view >> is excellent. I don't worry about column view and wouldn't use it >> on the >> mac if the mac's list view was half way decent. But each to their >> own as >> they say. That's why I like disk order instead of finder. >> >> David Truong >> >> EMail and Messenger: >> [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> >> Skype: blindboxer1967 >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Jacob >> Schmude >> Sent: Wednesday, 10 December 2008 1:07 AM >> To: General discussions on all topics relating to the use of Mac OS >> X by >> theblind >> Subject: Re: Finder problems. Pleaze help! >> >> Don't know if I'd agree with that, I do like quite a bit about the >> finder actually. Like everything, I guess, it's got its quirks though >> and certain things about it could certainly use an update. Column >> view >> in and of itself makes the finder far from a joke for me, I'd love to >> see something like that in other file managers. Windows explorer sort >> of has this, but it's a folder-only treeview and you have to tab back >> and fourth between it and the file list, and that to me is a joke. I >> also think quicklook is very useful, and I like its uncluttered >> interface. >> That being said, I hate the fact that it switches back to icon view >> sometimes. I hate those dot files it creates in remote folders >> (the .DS_Store files can be disabled, but that doesn't help some of >> the others it creates). I know what they're for, but it doesn't make >> them any less annoying. Its built-in FTP is a crack-up as well, no >> upload support? What were they thinking. >> I think it's mostly a matter of taste. I like the minimal approach >> Finder takes--it's a file manager, and that's all it tries to be. But >> sometimes I feel like getting ahold of some of the engineers who >> designed Finder and beating their heads against a wall :). It's sort >> of a love/hate thing, I guess. >> >> On Dec 9, 2008, at 08:48, David Truong wrote: >> >>> The Mac finder is a joke so I'm not surprised. >>> >>> -----Original Message----- >>> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >>> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Jacob >>> Schmude >>> Sent: Tuesday, 9 December 2008 10:07 PM >>> To: General discussions on all topics relating to the use of Mac OS >>> X by >>> theblind >>> Subject: Re: Finder problems. Pleaze help! >>> >>> Well, Vista does anyway. XP actually handles this very well once >>> configured properly, it opens all folders in your selected view. >>> This >>> is what Ars's rant claims Finder does, but on mine it most certainly >>> doesn't, and that's the problem. I want it to remember to open >>> everything, and I mean everything, in column view, but disk images >>> insist on going back to icon mode. At least OS X has a shortcut to >>> switch the views quickly, unlike Windows, and hitting command+3 >>> when a >>> disk image opens has pretty much become an automatic habbit I don't >>> even think about. >>> >>> >>> >>> On Dec 9, 2008, at 07:00, David Poehlman wrote: >>> >>>> You should see the mess windows makes of this. >>>> >>>> >>> >>> The major difference between a thing that might go wrong and a >>> thing that cannot possibly go wrong is that when a thing that cannot >>> possibly go wrong goes wrong it usually turns out to be impossible >>> to >>> get at or repair. >>> --Douglas Adams >>> >>> >>> >> >> The major difference between a thing that might go wrong and a >> thing that cannot possibly go wrong is that when a thing that cannot >> possibly go wrong goes wrong it usually turns out to be impossible to >> get at or repair. >> --Douglas Adams >> >> >> > > The major difference between a thing that might go wrong and a > thing that cannot possibly go wrong is that when a thing that cannot > possibly go wrong goes wrong it usually turns out to be impossible to > get at or repair. > --Douglas Adams > > > The major difference between a thing that might go wrong and a thing that cannot possibly go wrong is that when a thing that cannot possibly go wrong goes wrong it usually turns out to be impossible to get at or repair. --Douglas Adams
