On Mon, 2002-01-28 at 18:44, James Mitchell Allmond wrote: > > ********* > Nonsense. If there's one thing I really do dislike about the current > system, it's having to trace the CDROM and floppy down in the bowels > of /mnt (okay, they're not *that* far down, but when you have to climb > all the way up from your home directory, it's a nuisance). And I haven't > been using Linux so long I've forgotten the days of "where the hell is > this stuff mounted, anyway?" > > Which, of course, is why we have automounting and auto-creation of > desktop icons (which is a little buggy -- sorry I can't reproduce the > one I'm thinking of, guys, or I'd file it -- and may not be to > everyone's taste, but it works). > > And one thing novice users *shouldn't* have to know about is what > physical drives are in their machine and what's on which physical > drive -- the nastiest 20th-century legacy of Windows, IMHO, is the > way it still thinks in terms of drive letters. > > Anyway, my real point was that while I want quick access to the floppy > and CDROM *when I need to use them*, most of the time I don't, and > I'd rather save the screen real estate for other things. > ************ > > > > It has nothing to do with you use the most. It has to do with good book > keeping and being clear. Well, the *point* of toolbars in general is to give users quick access to frequently-used functions. So it seems that it does have to do with what you use the most. It's about partitioning a topic into it's core > subtopics. A user doesn't spend much time clicking between "My summary" > and "inbox" in evolution either but yet they are there taking up most of > the real estate. I do quite a bit, actually...that's why it's called the "shortcuts" bar....it lets you quickly switch between common functions. It also provides a quick visual of which folder I have new mail in. Why? Cause it breaks Evolution into the key components > of what it's for. What's a file browser for? It's for moving between > different data storage devices and manipulating or viewing their > contents. I *barely* have to move stuff to a floppy or from a cdrom. I'm all for a nautilus sidebar that has a "places" list, where you can add new ones, but it comes with nice defaults. (practically what the Nautilus Bookmarks are, I guess....it could use the same machinery) So your home dir, your removable devices, and whatever else you use frequently could be listed quickly. But remember, the more buttons and such you have, the harder it is initially to figure out how to use it - simply by virtue of more information to process. And you also force people to have a wider screen. If you do the vertical arrangement, and the user has the sidebar active too, then nautilus is split into 3 panels...which is getting pretty rediculous. At the heart of the whole purpose is the individual > components. When a author writes a book, does he let the reader use the > index as the primary source for organizing the material and as the means > of navigation? No, he breaks it into it's fundamental sections and > labels those in the outline. The index is just a extra tool for > specifics. These "Places" Icons are the exact same thing. > But are the sections on the top of every page? Do you have a fundamental problem with just making a sidebar for "places"? That seems like the simplest solution. > > > > _______________________________________________ > nautilus-list mailing list > nautilus-list lists eazel com > http://lists.eazel.com/mailman/listinfo/nautilus-list
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part