Existing users, 
Nevermind the features, the windows vs. Mac, etc... Please work on improving the speed or just stop wasting your time. This is not a meditation tool, and it's not an app to create artwork, where we can put up with the slow processing as long as the end result looks good. In this kind of apps, speed is the end result, and anything that's slower than the Finder is not going to replace it, no matter how intuitive it is, and no matter how many features you come up with.
For the same reason, I replaced Acrobat Reader with Preview to read pdf files, even though it doesn't offer 10 % of the features.
DiskOrder is a good example of Finder alternative that is inspired from a Windows Explorer alternative, and it's actually faster than the Finder. I'll stick to that, even though I prefer more the Macintosh Explorer's concept.
I'll check future versions, and I hope the developper won't simply get defensive and try to convince me that speed is not an issue in this case.
Macintosh Explorer X
windows explorer like file browser
Version: 4.5
Life is short
Feedback Type: Commentary
Contributed by: harsher Monday, March 21 2005 @ 01:15 PM PST
Product Platform: MacOSX
Used Product For: Less than a month
Comments
Life is short - harsher
OK, I'll rephrase it. I do care about stability, interface, features, security, etc. and I would put up with slow performance if the app is Photoshop or AfterEffects or FinalCut Pro, because at the end of the day (and night), I will have something to show that is superior to what I would get with other products, even if they were much faster.But this kind of apps is different. It's supposed to manage files and help us perform daily tasks. Moving a file to a folder using the Finder or MacExplorer will give the same results. AT the end of the day, the file will be in that folder. So what counts is how fast it is to locate the file and the folder, and how fast I can achieve that simple task. I can not put up with delays because there is nothing to gain in exchange. If you don't mind that, be my guest, and put your time where your mouth is. After all, we will all end up in the same place... eventually.
Wednesday, April 06 2005 @ 12:52 AM PDT
Life is short - ragesw
Well than you will be happy to know that Macintosh Explorer 4.3 is significantly faster than version 4.2.1 (As stated in the what's new section). For example, a folder with 20,000 files in it took almost 21 seconds to list in Macintosh Explorer 4.2.1. In version 4.3, it takes about 2 seconds. So you can see how much faster it actually is.*This is with a G4 DP 1.25Ghz
Wednesday, April 06 2005 @ 09:08 AM PDT
Life is short - Jeff Mincey
It's been a long time since I test drove a release of this product, but let's just suppose you are right that it's too slow. Even so, you don't speak for everyone in saying that performance is alone the overriding concern and that it supersedes all others.There are trade-offs to everything. Some people may find that the interface of this product more than offsets the price they pay in the form of a performance hit. This isn't to argue against performance optimizations by the developer but only to say that your apparent working assumption that everyone cares about performance above all other factors -- stability, interface, features, security, etc. -- is simply erroneous.
Reply to This
Tuesday, April 05 2005 @ 08:20 PM PDT