Grouping (moving) apps ok?

Hello!
Since owning my new Mac I've collected a couple of apps that I now'd like to put into descriptive sub-folders of the application folder, like "video" for instance. Would this be ok for apps that one has "installed"" by dragging them to the application folder? I'm not going to touch the included Apple-apps nor apps that came with an install-/uninstall script (like BOINC for example). Anything special I should take care for?

 

You need to be careful -- I tried this with Adobe CS3 and had lots of problems. The great thing is that if you move them, and something happens, you can just move them back.

 

Thanks for the warning. But I don't want to park the USS Nimitz (CS3) in another harbour just a small boat like, say, isquint Oh, I hear you say that a even a small boat can sink..

 

I honestly would not worry about making sub folders for your applications. Most will have no issues at all, but many advanced apps use support content, and need to stay in the proper install location.

definitely will cause more problems than good overall, as you can easily make subfolders with alias' in them, make stacks, or just do what you should be doing, putting the most used apps in the dock, and getting good with Spotlight Cmd+Space and quickly typing in the first few letters of the apps name and pressing return.

 

I'm actually using the technics you describe; for me it's also a matter of asthetics and being organised. I don't like endless lists of items in folders when using the finder wherever I can aviod it. Then I sometimes know which app I'm looking for, but can't remember the name. In such cases I can find it easily by the group it belongs to (which is why I already have a group "Favos" in my dock, you get the picture).

This brings me to another question: is it a technical necessity, demanded by the OS's structure, to copy the apps into the applications folder or could I place them elsewhere from the beginning? Thanks for your comments, it's much appreciated, since I'm still a bit new to OS X.

 

For me, the way OSX handles large folders and deep directory structure is also an issue. There aren't any hourglasses (or spinning beachballs) but it can take a very long time for me to navigate through large folders. I've gotten trained to use spotlight exclusively when launching apps. Perhaps I will get used to using spotlight for documents only I have no control over how documents are named when I receive them in an email and my quickest way to locate things is by date. I've rebelled against putting everything that comes along in "download" so that stack is wasted in my dock. I suppose I really should create my own stack that has stuff I use frequently.

As for moving apps around, I'm so delighted that apps aren't interwoven with dll's and other B$ after so many years of windows, I'm perfectly content to drag them to "applications" and leave them there. One thing I should point out is that OS X is a real unix. This means symbolic links work just fine. In a terminal window, change to the directory where you want the link to appear and type the following: " ln -s /Applications/AdobePhotoshopCS3.app ps.app" creates a link "ps.app" in your current folder that for all intents and purposes behaves just like the real thing. The best part is that if some process goes out to the OS and tries to get to stuff in the original path, it works because it's still there. This is also true for network drives. They are sitting in /volumes after they are mounted. You can run apps from the network using symbolic links as well. Careful, though. A symbolic link is merely a pointer so if the volume it points to isn't mounted it doesn't work.

Don't move anything. Nothing. Unlike windows where a shortcut can only be handled by one program, symbolic links on OS X really do work and work predictably for ALL programs. Simply create folders the way you like them and create symbolic links within those folders to whatever apps or data you want. When you edit a document using it's symbolic link, the original document gets updated. This means it is never necessary to have more than one copy of something, except perhaps as some soft of backup.

 

r0k,
thanks for the infos. Like you, I never was to happy with installing apps in Windows - files cluttered all over thew system, registry entries that never were removed after uninstalling the app and such/worse things. I was delighted when portable apps, initially ment for USB-sticks, became popular. I'm using some of them on my XP machine. Again, thanks to you and the others for responding.

 

You're welcome. I'm still not happy with the state of portable apps across platforms. I'd really like a portable firefox on usb that had the OSX, Windows and Linux binaries all in one place and all sharing a common set of data files. That would be a portable app. I use portable apps at the office so IT can't accuse me of cluttering their machine with downloaded stuff. I don't bother with the usb stick thing because there aren't any windows boxes at home for me to share with.

There was an application that allowed sharing of browser settings across computers (google browser sync) but it was so clunky, I frequently deleted entire sets of settings before I realized it. I finally uninstalled the extension and moved on. I wish somebody would do browser sync right, though. It would become the only available cross-platform portable app environment.

 

I feel your pain. I'm searching for EXACTLY such an app for ages now. It's so basic, I have no idea why this isn't an integrated feature of FireFox. Though I do see the idea behind storing your bookmarks online, I really want an app that does the job of syncing offline, locally, running right on my computers, no need to be connected to the internet, with a plethora of syncing options like, say, SyncToy from - drum roll - Microsoft.

BTW; why is there no usenet reader included with OS X? I've tried several options wich are either junk (not working at all), where the development is frozen, which are payware (MacSoup, Unison) or that are overkill for my needs, like SeaMonkey, which I'm using right now for usenet access. One more thing and my latest actions will receive a worldwide coverage in the news