[Usability]Nautilus criticism (Long)



I am not going to advocate a position on the default for the the sidebar
and toolbar. However, i am going to point out something i experienced
with nautilus while playing around with it when they are both off.
DISCLAIMER: I am using Slackware 8.1 so you may not have these problems,
oh, and this is fairly long. 
After both the location bar and side bar are turned off, the easiest way
for me to navigate around is by using the tool bar buttons: back,
forward, and up. right? ok. So, if I use the "Start Here" menu selection
in the Go menu, then i am see 5 choices: Favorites, Preferences,
Programs, Server Config, and System Setttings. I choose Programs. Now i
have a list of several folders i can choose from (Notice at this point
that the Up button does not work (It is insensitive). I select Games. At
this point, i decide that i do not want to play a game so i hit the up
button. (I know that everything is arranaged in a hierarchy). Hmm. Not
sure how to get to / from here, so i will just hit up some more. Oh
crap! the up button doesn't work anymore. I guess i will hit the back
button. Now i am back in the Games menu. (What the heck?!) So, i hit
back again and it brings me to a different screen. Now, i am finally
back to the start-here screen. It gets even worse if you traverse
further down and have to backtrack.
So, in other words to make a long story short: Nautilus does not follow
the tree structure that you would expect it to follow because after you
decend from "start-here:" to "programs:" you can not hit the up button
to ascend back up to "start-here:". The only way to get back up to the
"start-here:" screen is to go all the way back down to the deepest level
you went to, then all the way back up the way you came by using the
"back" button. While most of the time "back" will bring you up, and
"forward" will bring you down, in this example, you have to use "back"
to go down, then "back" will start to bring you back up. Now, if you say
that, "Yes, that might be true, but "start-here:" and "programs:" are
exceptions because they are not in the file system like your home
directory. That may be true, but how would anyone know that without the
location bar?
Linux is based on one single file system with everything being located
as a child of /, but Nautilus breaks that rule. It brings back memories
of DOS with different drive letters. eck! I not sure what the metaphor
is supposed to be for nautilus. On the one hand, it is like a big
hierarchy file system, but there are certain folders which are not
located in the hierarchy. But, on the other hand, it is kinda like a web
browser because you can click on "links" which bring you to different
screens and you have a history to allow you track backwards. But, if
nautilus is web browser, then how come you can't use it browse the web?
At this point, i am not sure what the meaning of this post is supposed
to be, but i know that it is mostly fueled by frustration. I know that a
lot of really hard work has gone into gnome, but it seems to me that we
are not gettting anywhere. I really want gnome to be great, but it seems
like it is just a pale imitation of something which doesn't deserve to
be copied in the first place. Sidebar and Toolbar defaults really don't
seem to matter if the user doesn't understand the metaphor in the first
place.
john

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part



[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]