2 ms·
Finder is terrible compared to Explorer, it is insanely unreliable. Often the VFS will get completely broken and claim that files don't exist when you try to op
by ubercow13 4y ago
Finder is terrible compared to Explorer, it is insanely unreliable. Often the VFS will get completely broken and claim that files don't exist when you try to open them, fail to allow renaming or opening files on network shares, etc. It's also dog slow. It's abysmally slow at generating file thumbnails especially when files are changing due to some other process. Often quicklook will get completely locked up and require kill-9'ing before thumbnails will appear again. It has other weird bugs like not showing thumbnails for search results in some cases eg. on network shares.
Finder has some nice features compared to Explorer but the actual quality of its coding seems to be terrible for what is probably the most important piece of userspace software on one of the 2 main commercial desktop OSs in existence.
- acdha 4y agoDo you have any system extensions or something like antivirus software installed? None of that is normal.
- ubercow13 4y agoNot really. I have a few thumbnail provider extensions installed but they shouldn't cause these issues. I am pretty sure these things are 'normal' - they are reported around the internet. Just look at the article - bugs in Finder are hardly unprecedented.
- dreamcompiler 4y agoMy gripe is that the Finder is still full of O[n] or even n^2 algorithms, which worked fine in 1990 when people had maybe 1000 files on the entire filesystem. But nowadays, 10 million files is a small file system. And O[n+] just doesn't cut it. Sometimes you can't do better than O[n], in which case you sweat the details of that inner loop very hard. Finder doesn't sweat much of anything. Any time I have to do something to a few thousand files or more I switch to the Terminal and use the command line because Unix [mostly] knows how to deal with large numbers of files efficiently.