Re: [Nautilus-list] Nautilus optimized?

--- Luke Hutchison <lukeh email com> wrote: > On 01
Jun 2001 15:06:32 -0500, Jamin Philip Gray
> wrote:
> because of how
> small and fast it is.
> I've found a much better alternative, which I've
> mentioned in a couple
> of other threads, yet this time I'm mentioning it
> completely aside
> from UI design issues:  I have been playing with the
> ROX filer
> ( ) and it is the
> fastest, cleanest,
> most powerful (in some respects, obviously Nautilus
> wins hands-down
> in others) graphical filer that I've ever used.  It
> is very simple to
> use but provides lots of "discoverable" features,
> like
> select-by-if-statement and a shell prompt line that
> may be enabled.
> After using it I think that it should be the filer
> that replaces
> gmc as the liteweight option to Nautilus.  Try it
> and see for
> yourself!
> I am in no way affiliated with the ROX author, I
> simply have found
> this filer to be very nice from both a novice and a
> power-user
> point of view, and it's fast and light.
Ah, a friend of mine showed me the *real* RISC OS
desktop a few weeks ago. Put it simply, I was blown
away. The idea of writing code in Assembly and Basic
does not appeal to me whatever the speed advantage is,
but as a desktop it was (and still is) so far ahead of
its time. He mentioned the Rox project in passing but
preferring RISC OS to Unix-like OSes he was not too
impressed by it, as a result it did not occur to me to
check it out until you mentioned it.

Anyway, I do agree that this will neatly complement
the GNOME 1.4/2.0 desktop. Was waiting for E 0.17 to
come out but this seems much more light-weight and
less 'propietary' - i.e. not using custom solutions
like E's edb. When I have spare time in a few weeks I
shall see what room there is for sharing with Nautilus
(the MIME-type database perhaps?)



Do You Yahoo!?
Get your free address at
or your free address at

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