@Lolita I am glad someone else here sees the importance of an entirely new filesystem.

@Davidravenmoon Apple stole the idea of folder hierarchies from Xerox in the 1970s. Xerox never brought the terrible idea to market but that was when the idea was birthed.

The Finder is hardly better then Windows. The only major advantage is the spotlight features that allow you to narrow down your search by using advanced search criteria.

@Ulyssesric The qwerty keyboard was invented in the 20th century and I use it because changing it would be like reinventing the wheel. By your logic we shouldn't have to make any advancement to cars because the wheel doesn't need to be redesigned.

How did I know that somebody was going to argue with me when I suggested that Apple has ever stolen an idea. The fact remains, who ever you want to believe came up with the idea, that it's origin came out at least as far back as the 1970s (and frankly I wouldn't want to take credit for an idea like that anyways.) The reason they used folder hierarchies was because computers were not powerful enough at the time to use a good search program.

This review:
http://arstechnica.com/apple/reviews/2011/07/mac-os-x-10-7.ars/13
suggests that Apple could extend the new Core Storage feature in Lion into a new file system in feature versions of OS X.

"There's nothing wrong with folder hierarchy."
Then you disagree with Steve Jobs when he said that both the Mac and Windows file systems are difficult to work with?

Well look at this! I was browsing through the features of Apple's new Mountain Lion and look at what I came across in this AppleInsider article:

"After introducing Auto Save and Revisions to OS X Lion, along with initial support for iCloud, the next major release of OS X dramatically changes how users can interact with documents.

Mountain Lion borrows the streamlined, graphical presentation of documents from iOS, where users select documents in apps like Apple's iWork without navigating through a hierarchical file system."

Yes, that's right you heard correctly Apple is gradually stripping out the folder hierarchy. I can't wait to hear how people will suddenly start saying how great the new way of doing it is just because Apple has annouced it instead of me!

Here is the link to the AppleInsider article:
http://www.appleinsider.com/articles/12/02/16/mountain_lion_brings_new_ios_like_file_handling_icloud_app_library_features.html

But if you want to have thousands of loose files....
They are not loose. They can be organized by smart folders so grouping is possible.

If Apple did away with access to the filing system, it would be a real problem for professional users who have to create documents and send them.....
If you look at the screen shot there is a share button down at the bottom. Therefore you can share files just like how you currently can in Lion.

This includes both graphic design and music creation, which is my two fields.
I work in graphic design and get along far better by not relying on the Finder. It can be done very well it's just that most people don't understand it. This will change over time.

So maybe it's something you want, but not all of us do."
Judging from comments I have read in forums a lot of people want this. The rest of the people just don't fully understand it yet.

No, a smart folder is not at all the same thing as a folder hierarchy. A folder hierarchy has many different levels of folders a smart folder is just a filter used to search particular file attributes.

"No one is going to be interested in your method."
Someone already made a post in this very thread agreeing with what I said, I will copy it here:

"I agree with Pik80. This legacy Finder is all that stands between Lion — which has great unrealized potential, despite all its retarded bugs — and serious productivity advances that are already doable but for the obvious limitations of the current file system."

Also I posted this topic several years ago at AppleInsider and the very first person who posted to my thread said the following:

"The Finder is the most poorly evolved component of the MacOS, having changed only superficially since 1984. If Apple replaced it with a more advanced concept, its absence certainly would not break my heart."

Here is someone else from the thread:

"I could go on all day about problems with the Finder, as I imagine any experienced Mac users could -- especially experienced Mac users who've tried to teach the Finder to inexperienced Mac users. The very fact that I could go on all day about the most hatable part of the Mac experience tells me that it's beyond redesigning. After 25 years of tinkering, it's really no better than it was when it was invented, and a damn sight worse in some respects, due to feature-creep and increased reliance on it's worn-out conceptual basis.

It's worth remembering that Apple blew our minds with the Finder, way back when. I'd prefer to have my mind blown again with some fresh new concept, rather than redesign the old one so it's even more feature-packed and more complicated to use. I'm not sure if the iOS approach is the one, but we can see Apple thinking out loud about expanding those concepts beyond the touch interface. The logic behind starting from a touch-based interface is powerful."

You can read all the replies to the thread here:
http://forums.appleinsider.com/showthread.php?t=114450

I lost the podcasts too but that isn't a big deal because you can just go sign up for them again. Unfortunately for me when I installed iTunes 10.5 and iOS 5 it wiped all my documents and I can't get them back now (when I right click on my iPod to restore it has been greyed out.)

I don't have a problem with Apple Mail either it's just that they are not getting the new features and is starting to become outdated (especially with the update in Lion.) Thanks for the recommendation, I will probably just stick with Mail, Thunderbird, and Postbox.

Lvdoc you can still group files together without having to rely on hierarchies. Think about how iPhoto uses albums and events, neither grouping relies on hierarchies. The same can be said of iTunes you can group music in playlists and there is no need for hierarchies. Lightroom allows you to you non-hierarchy folders and instead lets you only work with hierarchies through tags.

This is not just for apps that specialize in searching for just one type of file HoudahSpot and Punakea are excellent Finder alternatives that can search for any kind of file. HoudahSpot is especially good, it vastly improves on Apple's implementation on the spotlight in the Finder. The same company that makes HoudahSpot also makes another program I am not able to use on my machine called Tembo. I looks excellent as well, it is supposed to be a more advanced version of the spotlight window from Tiger. Once you begin using all these different solutions you begin to realize how much innovation that Apple could do in this area and yet they have done very little, we keep getting evolutionary updates to the Finder year after year after year. In Tiger they started introduced some semi revolutionary features with spotlight but that still just isn't enough.

"I never go digging through folders"
"I like sorting things in folders"
I'm confused.

"I don't want it to be like iPhoto"
I was thinking more along the lines of having the Finder being similar to HoudahSpot, Punakea, or Lightroom's tagging hierarchies. If you spend time working with tagging in these apps you will find that searching is done much quicker this way.

I couldn't get into Lauchbar but I think I will give it another try. Also Lauchpad is only for apps not for files. For searching for apps it is faster to use command-spacebar your app will come up in under a second of typing it in.

I am confused because of your two statements that are totally at odds with one another:
"I never go digging through folders"
"I like sorting things in folders"

Like I said in the previous comment there is nothing wrong with folders just folder hierarchies. Adobe very wisely removed folder hierarchies in Lightroom 2 even though they were present in the previous version. A very good discussion on their behalf. Adding tags to a file is not time consuming it only takes a few seconds to add a few tags and then saves several minutes later when you search using those tags. Because of this time saving it, obviously makes sense to remove the slower poorly organized way of search for files.

I also work in graphic design and I have had zero problems relying entirely on HoudahSpot/Punakea. It makes no sense to have to use the finder. It is fine to use hierachies but don't rely on folders for that rely on tags for that like Lightroom does. Tags are vastly superior because they can update automatically.

"But please explain why I would want all my image files for instance, dumped lose in the Pictures folder?"
Because you don't need to know where the file is located on the hard drive in order to open it. You can opnen pictures in iOS and you have no idea where they are located on the drive.

"Even iTunes its albums in folders, and then those folders in the artist folders, right?"
No, iTunes doesn't use folder hierarchies in any way. There is nothing in iTunes that goes deeper then one level.

"So explain to me where iTunes only goes one level."
Everywhere, the hierarchies you are talking about for storing music are the in the FINDER. You don't see any of those hierarchies in iTunes. That is the reason that iTunes became successful and other music programs where not because other software developers (like Microsoft's Windows Music Player) did not understand the incredible importance of riding the hierarchy from their software. iTunes has never, since version 1, had a hierarchy. This simplicity became the reason it did so successfully. People don't want to deal with that unnecessary complexity.

What I mean is hierarchies are not bad nor are folders bad but folder hierarchies are bad. I know that sounds extremely confusing but I will try to explain. I see what you mean by having hierarchies in iTunes but that is not a folder hierarchy so it is ok. But try using the finder the next time you want to play some music! That would be a very difficult way to browse! This seems like an absurd thing to do yet how is it any more absurd when you do it with other non music files?

The same thing goes in regards to a hierarchy in Lightroom but it is not a folder hierarchy the hierarchy is done completely with tags like it should be. When I shoot photography for a particular company I make an employees sub-tag, a products sub-tag, an equipment sub-tag and so on. It is very helpful to browse that way but if I was using folders to do create that hierarchy it would be clumsy. I do, however, think that they should improve the way they do tag hierarchies. Having to drag and drop tags up and down on that column on the right is very clumsy. In some ways I almost prefer the way Photoshop Elements lets you create tag Hierarchies.

"But Lightroom does show the directory tree on the left side."
But it is only one level deep so it is not a folder hierarchy. Adobe problem with tag hierarchies and removed them. Some people complained at the time but it is clear that it was the right direction to go.

"One of the big complaints for people on Windows is not being able to find their files. They have no idea where they were saved to, or what they were named. Mac users rarely have that problem."
At a recent Expo Steve Jobs said that Mac and Windows users have struggle with the file system.

"I have favorites set up in that, and can get to my often used folders in a flash. Much faster than with HoudahSpot."
Search results come back to me in literally a fraction of a second. Maybe you haven't tagged the files well enough for them to show up in HoudahSpot?

Searching music in the Finder most certainly is as difficult as I make it sound! In iTunes you can just type a search in and get a well organized listing back. Scrolling though the whole listing of folders in the Finder gives me a headache just trying it!

"So you can see how folder hierarchies makes things easier to find in the Finder."
No, I can't. Searching in iTunes is perfectly fine and searching though the Finder makes me want to throw my computer out the window!

"You should have those items in folders anyway, since that's how both of those page layout programs organize their project files (folder for images, etc)."
Yes, this was the way that I was taught to set up my InDesign work in design school but after I spent literally 20 minutes searching for a single file one day using the Finder and Spotlight I said enough is enough and tagged all the files in my computer so I could find them easily. I can now say that doing that along with making my office paperless where the best decisions I made in my life.

I understand how they tell you to put a project folder together with the fonts in one folder the images in another etc and I did it that way for many years until I asked myself why? After I had built up hundreds of project folders it becomes impossible to search for a project.

"Only newbes to computers have a problem with the Mac;'s filing system."
I am not a newbie. I learned computers starting with the Apple II and the KayPro and started using Macs back in the 80s. The file system worked back then for simpler tasks but computers now are too complicated for such an overly simplistic approach. Even Steve Jobs admitted to the the users difficulty with the file system in his iCloud demo recently. In Steve's first demo of Tiger's spotlight he pointed out that people might not end up using the Finder very much anymore which was implying that searching for files that way wasn't very desirable.

"I typed "Let it Be" into Spotlight. As soon as I stopped typing, the top hit was the Beatles Album "Let it Be", or the folder for that item. Took maybe six seconds."
Yes but it gives you lots of other results that are not the Beatles. I got "Let it Be Me" from Bob Dylan, "Let your Soul be your Pilot" by Sting etc. In iTunes you can tell it to search only by album name which immediately left only with tracks off the album that I was looking for. You can't do that in the Finder. Also in view column there is no easy way to tell what songs are from the artist you are looking for. It's just a hodgepodge of songs containing the words "Let", "it", and "Be". Not an easy way to search at all.

"But then you went to design school and leaned InDesign? InDesign was released in 1999. And schools surely were not teaching InDesign then. Quark was the number one page layout program."
Yes, obviously, like most InDesign users, I was a convert from other lesser page layout tools and was updating my knowledge to the current technology. Adobe positioned InDesign as a program mainly to attract existing computer page layout users, mainly using Quark, to switch over to their own software. The InDesign marketing campaign when it first came out kept talk about how InDesign was a "Quark Killer".

Like most people I have had to keep going back to school to keep learning technology as it continually keeps evolving. The people in my Design classes where mostly in their late 30s and 40s. Some of those people were designers previously in the field updating their skills and other students were starting a second career. I don't know why you just assume that everyone in my class is twenty years old. College students are not an exact age range like junior high or high school. College students can be any age, I even know a couple of senior citizens who went to college.

"Now if you look back at what I wrote earlier, I have 17,285 items in iTunes. I'm sure there are other with the words "let", "it" and "be" in the title. But I didn't get any of those."
That couldn't be, I only have 4,322 items in iTunes and I was getting results like "I've Been Let Down", "Let Love in", "Let's Go to Bed", "Let It Will Be", "Let You Dim Light Shine", "Let it Be Me", "Let Your Soul Be Your Pilot", and even words that begin with "Let" like the word "Letter" in "Love Letter Boxes". I only have a fourth as much content as you and I got over eight times as many results that were not from the Beatles album let it be?!? You must be lying. I can't just can't see how that can be possible!! I want to see a screen shot of that Finder search for myself. I won't believe it until I see it.

"Plus anyone can click on their sidebar to the music folder and see the iTunes folder with all the artist folders in alphabetical order."
It's possible to play music this way but it just it's the best way to search for your music. The best way to search for your music (or any other type of file) is to rid the file system of folder hierarchies. Do you see my argument here? You say that you don't like searching without a folder hierarchy in place but at the end of the day where do you search for your music files the Finder or iTunes? Where are you going to continue searching for files after we have had this discussion? Are you telling me that you are going to be going to use the Finder to search for your music from now on? Why won't you be doing that? If we have found a better way to search for our music why can't we find a better way to search for other types of files on our computers. I understand why you don't want to talk about this anymore, the evidence gets to be quite overwhelming when you really think this stuff though and don't say to yourself "this is the way I have always done it do it must be the best way."

"Not that anyone looks for music that way, so it was a poor choose of argument."
You said that folder hierarchies are a superior way to search for files. After discussing this it seems that there are a slew of problems with searching in folder hierarchies. This is why I continue to stand by my statement that the Finder MUST be completely replaced and not just merely fine tuned. The program has had it's time but it's usefulness is over. File searching needs to adapt to the increasingly complex ways in which people are using their computers these days. I wish that Apple would be leading the way in this area but the sad reality is that they are not.

"But then you went to design school and leaned InDesign? InDesign was released in 1999. And schools surely were not teaching InDesign then. Quark was the number one page layout program."
Yes, obviously, like most InDesign users, I was a convert from other lesser page layout tools and was updating my knowledge to the current technology. Adobe positioned InDesign as a program mainly to attract existing computer page layout users, mainly using Quark, to switch over to their own software. The InDesign marketing campaign when it first came out kept talk about how InDesign was a "Quark Killer".

Like most people I have had to keep going back to school to keep learning technology as it continually keeps evolving. The people in my Design classes where mostly in their late 30s and 40s. Some of those people were designers previously in the field updating their skills and other students were starting a second career. I don't know why you just assume that everyone in my class is twenty years old. College students are not an exact age range like junior high or high school. College students can be any age, I even know a couple of senior citizens who went to college.

"Now if you look back at what I wrote earlier, I have 17,285 items in iTunes. I'm sure there are other with the words "let", "it" and "be" in the title. But I didn't get any of those."
That couldn't be, I only have 4,322 items in iTunes and I was getting results like "I've Been Let Down", "Let Love in", "Let's Go to Bed", "Let It Will Be", "Let You Dim Light Shine", "Let it Be Me", "Let Your Soul Be Your Pilot", and even words that begin with "Let" like the word "Letter" in "Love Letter Boxes". I only have a fourth as much content as you and I got over eight times as many results that were not from the Beatles album let it be?!? You must be lying. I can't just can't see how that can be possible!! I want to see a screen shot of that Finder search for myself. I won't believe it until I see it.

"Plus anyone can click on their sidebar to the music folder and see the iTunes folder with all the artist folders in alphabetical order."
It's possible to play music this way but it just it's the best way to search for your music. The best way to search for your music (or any other type of file) is to rid the file system of folder hierarchies. Do you see my argument here? You say that you don't like searching without a folder hierarchy in place but at the end of the day where do you search for your music files the Finder or iTunes? Where are you going to continue searching for files after we have had this discussion? Are you telling me that you are going to be going to use the Finder to search for your music from now on? Why won't you be doing that? If we have found a better way to search for our music why can't we find a better way to search for other types of files on our computers. I understand why you don't want to talk about this anymore, the evidence gets to be quite overwhelming when you really think this stuff though and don't say to yourself "this is the way I have always done it do it must be the best way."

"Not that anyone looks for music that way, so it was a poor choose of argument."
You said that folder hierarchies are a superior way to search for files. After discussing this it seems that there are a slew of problems with searching in folder hierarchies. This is why I continue to stand by my statement that the Finder MUST be completely replaced and not just merely fine tuned. The program has had it's time but it's usefulness is over. File searching needs to adapt to the increasingly complex ways in which people are using their computers these days. I wish that Apple would be leading the way in this area but the sad reality is that they are not.

Tech support help me figure this out. When on a G5 you have to run in 32-bit mode. You get to 32-bit mode by clicking the application icon and going to the get info window.