Re: [Usability] Re: [Desktop_architects] Printing dialog and GNOME

[Mateusz Łoskot <mateusz loskot net>]

Jan wrote:
> Mateusz Łoskot:
>
>> First, MC is console based.
>> Second, every other TC-like manager for Linux does not fit GNOME well.
>> Please, try to imagine why Krusader (http://krusader.sourceforge.net)
>> project has been started. As its overview says "file manager for KDE"
>> what
>> implies it fits (will) KDE well.
>
> Well, I think that really hits the nail on the head there. A two-pane
> manager really is a different kind of beast from the usual kind. The
> only thing they have in common is the basic idea of managing files.

Do you think so?
I think we are talking about usability, in general.
As most of operating systems users want to manage their files, so they
need usable file manager.
I know it's may be discussed which one is more usable: single-pane,
two-pane or multi-pane.
But if there are more and more voices voting for MC-like manager why not
to move to this direction? or why not to provide Nautilus supporing two
approaches of usage?

>
> Just like Krusader is a separate application from Konqueror, a two-pane
> manager really has no place as part of Nautilus either.

Simply, why?

> It would live
> much better as a separate application altogether. A different kind of
> example, I guess, would be having Gimp and Inkscape as separate apps
> despite them both editing graphics.

I don't understand your explanation at all.
Why Nautilus could not be based on two-panes?
Besides required manpower, where is the problem?

> Asking the Nautilus devels for this is probably not the best idea. The
> Nautilus people are wortking on Nautilus precisely because they like the
> kind of interface that Nautilus provides, and are unlikely to want to
> write a second app doing it differently.

Yes, but Nautilus is almost GNOME, I mean Nautilus is strongly integrated
to GNOME. And if Nautilus developers don't want to hear users comments
they simply define some limitations to GNOME, as a whole.

Let's discuss it from another point of view.
If GNOME Stuff would launch a poll asking users what kind of file manager
they prefer: single-pane (as current Nautilus) or two-panes TC-like
manager,
and if users would prefer the second one what GNOME Stuff is supposed to do?
Leave Nautilus as is or try to make it more usable for GNOME users, just
as they wish?

Simply, if Nautilus is so strognly integrated then it should not be
developed according to so few ideas. Or let's make Nautilus less tight
with GNOME and don't force users to use it.
Now, if I install another file manager I still have to play with Nautilus
in some areas.

I believe you've got my point of view.


> What needs to happen is that
> someone that really likes and uses this kind of interface steps up and
> writes it. In fact, I believe there are more than one attempt out there
> already; a better way may well be to revive one of those flagging
> projects instead.

IMHO, the problem may be in the GNOME organization. As I said, GNOME
project seems to has choosen Nautilus. So, new projects has minor chances
to take Nautilus place.

> And for what it's worth, I actually see very little "interface Nazism"
> around Gnome, despite what Linus says. People are very open to new
> ideas; the only thing that is difficult is to get things in the default
> desktop core - with old Gnome1 that was very easy, and it became a
> bloated horrible mess as a result, with a very painful year of rewriting
> as a result. Nobody wants that again, which is why people are
> conservative about adding stuff into the core.

Yes, that's a good reason against new ideas.

Cheers
-- 
Mateusz Łoskot
http://mateusz.loskot.net