Re: [Nautilus-list] performance and usability

[John Fleck <jfleck inkstain net>]

> 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
> > truth.
> > 


Simply saying "much more is needed for nautilus to become a reasonable file
browser" is, again, not specific enough to be of much use.

If all you're saying is "Nautilus needs to be faster," I sarcastically slap my
forehead and say, "Doh, wish *I'd* thought of that." Seth's post on speed, and
the discussion that followed, is obvious evidence that people already
understand that, as you put it, "plain truth", and are working hard on the
issue.

Your original post said a modern file browser should not have all the bells
and whistles at the expense of performance. Which bells and whistles do you
think should be removed to aid performance? You said Nautilus is "as fluid as
solid iron when it comes to navigation". Could you elaborate on your
navigation difficulties? Maybe they can be fixed.

If you're going to try to offer helpful criticism, you need to be specific
enough for the criticism to be helpful.

Cheers,

John