Re: [Nautilus-list] performance and usability

[James Mitchell Allmond <gte203h prism gatech edu>]

I did see the Nautilus2/Gnome 2.0 post but that still isn't good enough.
It's certainly a nice improvement but much more is needed for nautilus
to become a reasonable file browser. I'm not trying to be mean or
hateful towards the developers but I am trying to lay out the plain
truth.

On Fri, 2002-01-25 at 04:03, Christian Rose wrote:
> fre 2002-01-25 klockan 07.42 skrev James Mitchell Allmond:
> > I hate to be negative but Nautilus is very unusable from a user point of
> > view. Even though today's file browsers have to have all the bells and
> > whistles, it should not be at the expense of performance. As of now
> > nautilus performs so god awful in terms of general speed and
> > responsiveness, that's it's unusable and unacceptable as a day to day
> > file browser.
> [...]
> 
> Hi James.
> 
> If you had read the archives of this list, you'd know that performerance
> is one of the areas where the GNOME 2.0 version of Nautilus is
> significantly improved (See Seth's recent mail). So GNOME 2.0 should
> bring you a better performerance experience in this regard.
> 
> Also, while I think a lot of your criticism is valid, I find the general
> negative tone in the mail to be quite disappointing. Nautilus is a
> volunteer project and most of the (relatively few) developers are not
> paid to be working on Nautilus. If you want some feature that you think
> is missing, the best way is to contribute a patch. I'm sure your
> contributions are welcome.
> 
> 
> Christian
> 
>