Re: volumes mark 2

[Jürg Billeter <j bitron ch>]

On Mon, 2003-09-22 at 15:38, Alexander Larsson wrote:
> On Mon, 2003-09-22 at 09:33, Jürg Billeter wrote:
> > I would tend to another solution: The Documents, Pictures, Music folders
> > are in ~ but there are icons on the desktop which open these folders.
> > The icons can be purely virtual (like the Trash icon) or
> > .desktop-Entries. The advantage (and disadvantage) of the virtual
> > version is that a user can't accidentally (but also not consciously)
> > delete such an icon.
> > The advantage is that the Documents folder's location remains in the
> > home directory, which is IMO much more logical than in the ~/Desktop
> > directory. Imagine you use a console editor to modify a document, why
> > should we need to use the ~/Desktop directory in a console?
> 
> As I said before, I think this is the worst possible combination. It
> just messes up both the home and the desktop concepts and creates
> confusion about what directory is where.
I don't think it's the worst possible combination. I see your point, I
see what could confuse users. You know that Windows uses a similar
approach: The "My Documents" icon and similar ones are virtual icons on
the desktop which link to a directory outside the Desktop directory. If
you're right, all Windows users are confused by these icons...

I would be at least a much confused with your solution, why shall all my
Documents, Pictures, etc. be in my Desktop folder?

Perhaps these virtual icons should be marked with an emblem to make a
distinction to user created ("real") folders.

> > > Also on the desktop, as before, is trash, mounted removable media,
> > > plugged in hardware (mp3 players, cameras etc) and links to connected
> > > servers. I'm not sure whether we want a "Computer" link on the
> > > desktop, but I think not. Its not a commonly used thing, since all the
> > > mounted volumes are already reachable from the desktop.
> > 
> > - Trash: fine
> > 
> > - Mounted removable media / plugged in hardware: What about one (virtual
> > or .desktop) icon named Storage or perhaps Devices which would be a
> > container of all media etc. This way the desktop won't get cluttered.
> > IIRC Ximian introduced a devices:// uri, something like that would be
> > fine.
> > - Links to connected servers: Similar as above, show the connected
> > servers in the network:// window and put a network icon on the desktop.
> 
> How is this different from "Computer"? 
> You just changed the name, and splitted out the network mounts to a
> separate place. (And the split doesn't make any sense to me, you want
> all your commonly used storage in one place.)
I'm not sure. Perhaps you're right, the user shouldn't see much a
difference in local and remote storage devices. But perhaps there is a
better describing name than just "Computer". For me, "Storage" doesn't
sound bad, but this decision shall probably be taken by a native English
speaker.
OTOH if you want to have the two things merged, they should alwasy be
merged. IOW there can't be a network: uri but IIRC from your mails you
don't plan to remove/merge this uri.

> > I'd like to bring up an additional idea. Put all the automatically
> > generated / virtual icons of the desktop on a panel, too. This could be
> > in an applet or in the notification area or whatever, the main point is
> > that these icons should always be visible. This idea is another reason
> > for combining all the removable media in one and all the network servers
> > in one icon; we can't have dozens of icons by default in the panel.
> 
> The panel is already overfull with things. The icons we're proposing
> hardly fits on the desktop at smaller resolutions. How can it ever fit
> on the panel. 
I proposed above that removable media won't be directly thrown on the
desktop, so there won't be many icons. And users with smaller
resolutions should have the possibility to remove/hide it for sure. But
I definitively hate the idea that it's impossible to see removable media
without looking on the desktop below all my open windows.

> We couldn't decide on what to use the notification area for, but surely
> having the file manager icons there wasn't on the proposed lists. That
> sounds like a really bad match to me. Its not "notifying" you of
> anything.
Yes, you're absolutely right. The notification area shouldn't be misused
for that.

> > The tree view of the file manager should have the following root nodes:
> > + Home Folder (or Persoal Files if that fits better)
> > + Filesystem [Root]
> > + Storage/Devices
> >   - removable media, etc...
> > + Network
> >   - connected servers,...
> > + Trash
> 
> You want the removable media/network to be under an actual subtree? That
> sounds bad to me. There isn't gonna be much mounted media, so this just
> wastes space when its empty and time when you have to open it. 
Not much mounted media, but perhaps a couple of connected servers. And
if the servers are under a subtree, I would put removable media under
one, too - looks more consistent to me.
But if you really merge removable media and network, there will be just
one subtree anyway.

Thank you for your fast and detailed response!

Regards,

Jürg Billeter