Re: The Future of Nautilus: Tree Sidebar and Split View

[Holger Berndt <berndth gmx de>]

On Mon, 28 Jun 2010 15:37:29 +0100 Allan Day wrote:

> Next up: tree sidebar and split view.

[...]

> Some criticisms have been levelled at split pane in the past. I don't
> really want to revisit those now.

I have read statements about split pane in the past that can hardly be
called "criticism" in any constructive or reasonable way. I haven't
read much real criticism yet. In fact, I didn't see any negative
comments from outside of your group at all, yet.

On the other hand, I got quite some positive feedback from users; and
the press coverage that I've seen after 2.30 was also very positive.

> I think there are probably better
> ways to integrate this feature into the UI though - Garrett's got
> some good ideas there.

I'm curious to see those. Even more since Garrett didn't seem to
understand what split pane is all about in the first place.

> Windows Explorer and Finder have a single sidebar, no tabs and
> no panes, and there are good reasons why they don't.

Many other default file managers for many years don't have anything
closely remote to GIO/GVFS either. There are good reasons why they
don't. Virtual filesystems for remote places are a pretty obvious
complication for the mental model - but they're also incredibly useful.
I can only guess why I haven't heard much about removing GVFS for
simplicity reasons: Because in contrast to split pane, by
coincidence, you guys use GVFS yourselves.

That's the danger when having a small group of 2, 3 or 4 individuals
sitting together and thinking about what all the rest of the world
needs, or worse, what it doesn't need: The view is inherently skewed.

But, as you're starting the comparison with MS or Apple products:
Windows and Mac don't have many things that GNOME has. That powers a
huge software industry.

When you're done with Nautilus, are you going to simplify GEdit down
to what Windows' notepad.exe can do, next?

> The basic aim of the future nautilus proposal is simplification.

I thought the fundamental design goal was to enable to user to do their
file management tasks easily and efficiently, and simplification was
hoped to be a tool to reach that goal. I would definitively have agreed
to that, up to a certain extent. But ...

> Simplicity is a virtue in all kinds of ways. 

... obviously I was wrong, and simplicity is the goal in its own right.
And to that, I do not agree.

> Paring down the UI is good for users (since it gives them less to
> process), 

No. I can tell you what's good for users: If the application helps them
to get their work done. They don't open Nautilus to enjoy its look.
Nautilus is a file manager, and people open it when they want to manage
their files.

And anyways: Split pane has very, very little impact on the default UI.
It's a single, tiny menu item. 

Holger