# browse -vs- groups

**URL:** <https://forum.high-logic.com/t/browse-vs-groups/2639>\
**Category:** Implemented Feature Requests\
**Created:** [November 25, 2009, 3:05pm UTC](https://forum.high-logic.com/t/browse-vs-groups/2639 "2009-11-25T15:05:12Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 1\
**Page:** 1

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Brother\_Gabriel-Mari](https://forum.high-logic.com/user_avatar/forum.high-logic.com/brother_gabriel-mari/32/9065_2.png) [@Brother\_Gabriel-Mari](https://forum.high-logic.com/u/Brother_Gabriel-Mari)\
**Post date:** [November 25, 2009, 3:05pm UTC](https://forum.high-logic.com/t/browse-vs-groups/2639/1 "2009-11-25T15:05:12Z")

</div>

Hello!  
While organizing fonts, I found myself in the dillemma of how to do it. I like the idea of font groups named “Western”, “Crazy”, “3D”, “Gothic”, etc. But why should I not just do this in the browse tab? If I just move the fonts to folders in the browse tab, then I can click the “see through folders” button and see everything inside. When I use groups, there is no such button, and if “Western” and “3D” are subgroups of “Crazy” then I can’t see them unless I click on each individual folder. This is painful if I want to find a font and I can’t remember what group it is in. And then there is the problem that MT doesn’t update shortcuts if you move a font and your shortcuts in the groups become . So why would I use groups instead of browse? Maybe if MT remembered its shortcuts, and if MT had a “see through folders” button in the Groups button things would be better.