Re: Gnome 2.6: What were you thinking?

"Manuel Amador (Rudd-O)" <amadorm usm edu ec> writes:

> Short answer:
> It's by design.  And it's better.

Wrong start. spatial isn't 'better', far from it. It might be better
for a few task, but its a lot worse for other tasks.

> Whenever people use computers, they mainly manipulate things on your
> screen.  Software (more accurately, interface) designers have found that
> one of the best ways to get people to use computers and be productive is
> to <i>mimic the real life</i>, in other words, to apply metaphors from
> the real life to what you see on the screen.  This is why you hear words
> as "Home folder" or "Desktop".

Again, I find the wording bad choosen, sounds to much like 'we know
better than you what is good for you'. Ease of use might be increased
by mimic real life, but productivity not really.

> In regard to files and folders, interface designers found people had an
> easier time understanding each folder as a separate collection of
> documents (and folders, albeit that distinction is harder to
> understand).

Hm, what would be the alternative 'understanding' of folders? Just

> Despite that, modern operating systems give you a "browser"
> interface to navigate around your files: that is, you click on a
> folder, and the contents of the window change to show that folder.

I don't see how that clashes with the model of thinking about folders
as collection of documents.

> Suffice it to say, people get lost and find navigating for files
> hard, because looking for files is an entirely different operation
> than browsing the Web (your brain works differently while you're at
> it).

How that? I often even 'abuse' the browser for browsing my files,
since I still find it often superior (ie. quicker, has text input,
type-ahead find) to Nautilus. Especially I don't see how people 'get
lost', as with internet, URL-bar happily shows you were you are.

> In this regard, GNOME has taken a very good idea from the Mac OS
> operating system and other graphical environments, and made the
> "folder" into the "window".

Well, quite a few people don't think that was a 'very good idea'.

> * Each folder you open *always* opens in the same exact location and
> with the same size

Doesn't hurt of course, but doesn't really matter much either for most

> * Each folder unequivocally opens in its own window, just like files do
> as well

I don't have to navigate through the files to reach other files, thats
why opening a windows is ok, but I have to navigate through folder to
reach other files, while doing that am pretty seldomly interested in
the 'backrecord' of where I where before and back/parent-button can be
bring there anyway when needed. With deep directory (ie. everything
larger then two levels) this leads to an insane amount of clutter on
the desktop with spatial view. That said I find spatial view pretty
much impossible to use with deep directory trees.

> * There is much less screen clutter, less toolbars, less screen
> estate devoted to controls, and more screen for your files

I find the multiple windows cluttering my screen far more distractive
then a little toolbar. Especially since the toolbar is a usefull thing
and having a good visible parent-dir button is a good thing, took a
long time for me to find out that I can actually click this little
thing that hides in the statusbar.

> * Dragging files around and dropping them becomes much easier

Yep, but I do that very seldomly, after all I save my stuff in the
right folders at save time, so there is little need to move them later
on. And even if I need drag&drop every half serious filemanager will
open me another windows with minimum effort (middle-click or such).

> * Looking for files and getting to them is *faster*

How that? Spatial view provides NO text input (the fasted may to
navigate through lots of files when you know them), clutters the
screen with my browse history and provides really nothing to speed up
browsing (no back-button or such). So I would says that spatial view
is a good slowdown for browsing files.

> Once you get used to it (which can take up to a week), you'll discover
> you work faster. 

Again, that would be worth a bit of explanation.

> Things you used to think about will become automatic, and you will
> lose less time trying to get things done. The work environment will
> feel "just right".

No, feels just wrong here.

> Here's a "cheat-sheet" that will help you get up to speed in using the
> keyboard (you probably know by now that using the keyboard is also
> faster than using only the mouse):

A visible toolbar would be much prefered then keyboard magic. Rox does
this right by basically providing just a single keyboard shortcut '/',
the rest is just normal text typing.

JabberID: grumbel jabber org 
ICQ:      59461927

[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]