4 ms·

> Drive-by-wire can be made safe. Sure, if you're willing to spend 70 million dollars on a car. Snarky one-liners aside, this hits on one of my pet peeves: so

> Drive-by-wire can be made safe. Sure, if you're willing to spend 70 million dollars on a car. Snarky one-liners aside, this hits on one of my pet peeves: software quality. I mean, there's no reason why my IDE should die every time it tries to open a .sql file bigger than about 500K, but it does; there's no reason why MacOS X shouldn't have a "refresh" command in its Finder views, but it doesn't; there's no reason why I have to bang my head against software issues every single day, but I do. So, while the optimistic technologist in me would like to see what cars could do with more advanced computer-controlled systems, the experienced and pragmatic technician in me is really not looking forward to it.

Groxx 17y ago
there's no reason why MacOS X shouldn't have a "refresh" command in its Finder views What would you use it for? It already updates in less than a second. If you're looking for extremely up-to-date info, you're probably not a "Finder-only" user, and know how to use the terminal, so use that. OSX is tiered, it doesn't give you all options at the simplest level, which is a HUGE reason for its success. Correctly so, IMO. No option overload, it "just works". Want more control? The terminal is right there. Learn how to use it and you'll pick up better practices than mashing the refresh button. (not implying you are, just making a general statement)
- thaumaturgy 17y ago
  The Finder frequently loses sync over Samba networks; the "updates in less than a second" doesn't work perfectly (or even really all that well in a lot of cases). The only fix for such a situation is to restart the Finder. I don't see how Command-R wouldn't be a better solution. Incidentally, I'm far from the only technician dealing with mixed environments on a daily basis that's had this complaint.
  - Groxx 17y ago
    Samba networks do that for me on Windows too, despite the ability to refresh the window. More often, it'll crash Explorer rather than actually update the info if something is already clogging the tubes. Plus, network shares almost never update that quickly, and expecting them to do so is rather ridiculous. Round-trip time to a server clearly wasn't implied as part of the Finder update speed. And again, I'll point out that the terminal is right there. If it's Finder that's slow, the terminal will still work. If the terminal doesn't keep up-to-date, then it's a problem with their implementation of Samba, not Finder, and a refresh button would do nothing (except maybe nail your network with unnecessary requests by most people mashing it when something doesn't work).
    - thaumaturgy 17y ago
      Well, I guess we can continue to dicker about the relative merits of a "Refresh" command in the MacOS X Finder, except: 1) It's not just Samba networks, it's other things too, up to and including 10.5 [1]. 2) People have gone to the trouble to write Applescripts to do the job for them. [2] 3) "Just use Terminal" does not justify a broken auto-update system, which... 4) ...is all fine and dandy when it works, but really needs some kind of sensible fall-back system when it doesn't, which... 5) ...brings us to the original point, which was that continuing to integrate software of this quality into automobiles, without manual override systems, is just plain stupid. So, would you like to continue to beat this dead horse? [1]: http://robsheldon.com/brokenopsys http://robsheldon.com/brokenopsys -- in which the problem frustrates me enough to actually complain about it. [2]: http://www.tuaw.com/2007/04/16/refresh-the-finder/ http://www.tuaw.com/2007/04/16/refresh-the-finder/

Groxx 17y ago

there's no reason why MacOS X shouldn't have a "refresh" command in its Finder views What would you use it for? It already updates in less than a second. If you're looking for extremely up-to-date info, you're probably not a "Finder-only" user, and know how to use the terminal, so use that. OSX is tiered, it doesn't give you all options at the simplest level, which is a HUGE reason for its success. Correctly so, IMO. No option overload, it "just works". Want more control? The terminal is right there. Learn how to use it and you'll pick up better practices than mashing the refresh button. (not implying you are, just making a general statement)

thaumaturgy 17y ago
The Finder frequently loses sync over Samba networks; the "updates in less than a second" doesn't work perfectly (or even really all that well in a lot of cases). The only fix for such a situation is to restart the Finder. I don't see how Command-R wouldn't be a better solution. Incidentally, I'm far from the only technician dealing with mixed environments on a daily basis that's had this complaint.
- Groxx 17y ago
  Samba networks do that for me on Windows too, despite the ability to refresh the window. More often, it'll crash Explorer rather than actually update the info if something is already clogging the tubes. Plus, network shares almost never update that quickly, and expecting them to do so is rather ridiculous. Round-trip time to a server clearly wasn't implied as part of the Finder update speed. And again, I'll point out that the terminal is right there. If it's Finder that's slow, the terminal will still work. If the terminal doesn't keep up-to-date, then it's a problem with their implementation of Samba, not Finder, and a refresh button would do nothing (except maybe nail your network with unnecessary requests by most people mashing it when something doesn't work).
  - thaumaturgy 17y ago
    Well, I guess we can continue to dicker about the relative merits of a "Refresh" command in the MacOS X Finder, except: 1) It's not just Samba networks, it's other things too, up to and including 10.5 [1]. 2) People have gone to the trouble to write Applescripts to do the job for them. [2] 3) "Just use Terminal" does not justify a broken auto-update system, which... 4) ...is all fine and dandy when it works, but really needs some kind of sensible fall-back system when it doesn't, which... 5) ...brings us to the original point, which was that continuing to integrate software of this quality into automobiles, without manual override systems, is just plain stupid. So, would you like to continue to beat this dead horse? [1]: http://robsheldon.com/brokenopsys http://robsheldon.com/brokenopsys -- in which the problem frustrates me enough to actually complain about it. [2]: http://www.tuaw.com/2007/04/16/refresh-the-finder/ http://www.tuaw.com/2007/04/16/refresh-the-finder/