Re: [Nautilus-list] performance and usability
- From: Ric Tibbetts <ric chadera net>
- To: James Mitchell Allmond <gte203h prism gatech edu>
- Cc: Christian Rose <menthos menthos com>, Nautilus List <nautilus-list lists eazel com>
- Subject: Re: [Nautilus-list] performance and usability
- Date: 25 Jan 2002 10:04:50 -0800
Something to keep in mind here.
1) A version 1.x product. It's not a 10 year old product that has had
time to mature. It's new, and has a way to go.
2) It's being developed by "volunteers". Not by a room full of
programmers, being paid fat saleries to generate code.
While I understand your comments, try to remember the above. Nautilus is
a work in progress. Constructive critisizm is always well received by
developers. If there is a specific feature that you'd like to see, I''ve
allways seen the requests well received, and many discussed at length.
But to come on the list and just blast it for the sake of pure
negativism, is just childish, and inexcusable. It reminds me too much of
the Microsoft Moles, who are sent out to these list to spread such
negative feed back, and discourage people from using this stuff.
So to you I would simply say:
If you don't like the product, and can't make any positive feedback:
Then just don't use it, and kindly go away.
Disclamer: The opinions expressed above are my own. I have no connection
whatsoever with either the Gnome, or the Nautilus projects.
On Fri, 2002-01-25 at 09:14, James Mitchell Allmond wrote:
> 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
> 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
> nautilus-list mailing list
> nautilus-list lists eazel com
Linux registration number: 55684
If you want to help advertise Linux - point your friends to
] [Thread Prev