Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123
Results 21 to 30 of 30

Thread: GNOME 3.2 Has A New File Manager Available

  1. #21

    Default

    Nautilus uses breadcrumbs, you can use that to jump to the parent directory or any other directory in the path. A 'dedicated' parent directory button would be redundant.

  2. #22
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    271

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by AnonymousCoward View Post
    Nautilus uses breadcrumbs, you can use that to jump to the parent directory or any other directory in the path. A 'dedicated' parent directory button would be redundant.
    You make that sound like it's a problem. Providing several paths to the same end result should be considered a feature. It allows people to use the action that best suits their usage patterns.

  3. #23
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    418

    Default Gnome Commander?

    Why did they not join forces with Gnome Commander instead? Now there are two identical programs: Emperor and Gnome Commander.

  4. #24
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Stockholm, Sweden
    Posts
    429

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kebabbert View Post
    Why did they not join forces with Gnome Commander instead? Now there are two identical programs: Emperor and Gnome Commander.
    It's the awesomeness of CHOICE and free software. The power and right to fork every program out there, instead of working together. Then you stop development after a couple of months or so, since nobody has time do put all their time into it singlehandedly.

  5. #25
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    1,502

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by locovaca View Post
    You make that sound like it's a problem. Providing several paths to the same end result should be considered a feature. It allows people to use the action that best suits their usage patterns.
    There are several reasons for why a single way of doing something is considered better: 1. less code maintenance, 2. interface is easier to learn, 3. more pure metaphors can be used (by choosing a single way to do things a desktop can be designed with limited scope but still be able to do most things easily).
    ...
    Sorry, I've got to go.

  6. #26
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    271

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by liam View Post
    There are several reasons for why a single way of doing something is considered better: 1. less code maintenance, 2. interface is easier to learn, 3. more pure metaphors can be used (by choosing a single way to do things a desktop can be designed with limited scope but still be able to do most things easily).
    ...
    Sorry, I've got to go.
    Sounds like we don't need all of these Linux Distributions then. Or Operating Systems. Or PC Manufacturers. We should all be using the same systems built in the same factory shipped from the same place running the same OS and same set of programs that have no functional overlap, right? Or shall you continue to arbitrarily decide what can be duplicated and what cannot be?

  7. #27
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    141

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by liam View Post
    There are several reasons for why a single way of doing something is considered better: 1. less code maintenance, 2. interface is easier to learn, 3. more pure metaphors can be used (by choosing a single way to do things a desktop can be designed with limited scope but still be able to do most things easily).
    ...
    Sorry, I've got to go.
    Last time i tried gnome3, the activities could be reached by just moving the mouse to the top left or by clicking on that "activities"-Button. Again - more paths then needed?

    "Move one Up" and "move to a specific folder somewhere in the hierarchie of parent directories" can't be called the same "metaphor" (or just job). Also handling one static "up"-button is easier from the users POV, when you don't remember exactly, where a specific file or folder lies in the path up. Hover mouse over the button, move your eyes to the file view, press once and watch, press again, again, until you find what you are looking for. You don't have to move your eyes away to find where to click.
    Breadcrumb forces you to move your eyes away from the file-view to find the point where to click (the last entry in the breadcrumb). So you constantly have to refocus which is tiring.

  8. #28
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Posts
    174

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by locovaca View Post
    You make that sound like it's a problem. Providing several paths to the same end result should be considered a feature. It allows people to use the action that best suits their usage patterns.
    The breadcrumb widget is basically a giant up button that gives you a lot more control. Multiple paths can sometimes be good, clean design is also good - sometimes you have to choose between goods. The downside is that some people will need to retrain themselves slightly, the upside is that once that muscle memory is changed you should be able to accomplish the same task with less effort.

  9. #29
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    1,502

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by locovaca View Post
    Sounds like we don't need all of these Linux Distributions then. Or Operating Systems. Or PC Manufacturers. We should all be using the same systems built in the same factory shipped from the same place running the same OS and same set of programs that have no functional overlap, right? Or shall you continue to arbitrarily decide what can be duplicated and what cannot be?
    Probably should've prefaced that by saying that what I said is the idea, not that I subscribe to it.
    As for your comments, that's not a bad idea IF we know the best model to build to, but we don't.
    Also, I don't think the choices the designers have made are arbitrary, they just aren't well communicated.

  10. #30
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    1,502

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by schmalzler View Post
    Last time i tried gnome3, the activities could be reached by just moving the mouse to the top left or by clicking on that "activities"-Button. Again - more paths then needed?

    "Move one Up" and "move to a specific folder somewhere in the hierarchie of parent directories" can't be called the same "metaphor" (or just job). Also handling one static "up"-button is easier from the users POV, when you don't remember exactly, where a specific file or folder lies in the path up. Hover mouse over the button, move your eyes to the file view, press once and watch, press again, again, until you find what you are looking for. You don't have to move your eyes away to find where to click.
    Breadcrumb forces you to move your eyes away from the file-view to find the point where to click (the last entry in the breadcrumb). So you constantly have to refocus which is tiring.
    I'm not going to defend their every decision. It should be obvious that not all of them are to the user's best interest.
    For your first point, are you asking me if more paths are needed? Yes, one more path should be created by using gestures (having used GS on a tablet trying to touch the hot corner is not as easy as it should be, but I also think EVERY tablet gui needs to be heavily rethought with gestures in mind).
    The second point is a bit harder. File browsing is not really a metaphor. It is a direct translation of how the computer stores things to the user in visual form. An abstraction (part of DE wide metaphor) would be activities (which is where Gnome SHOULD be going but I've seen little to no actual work towards this) but that is a pretty radical change to how we deal with computers for the most part, or pervasive searching (which I think they are moving towards).
    So while file management is a bit messier in GS the idea is so low level that all file managers are pretty sucky (though Dolphin is definitely the least sucky).

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •