Slashdot Mirror
Nautilus 1.0.5 Release
mz001b writes: "Proof that just because a company goes out of business does not mean that their open source software goes with them -- Nautilus 1.0.5 has been release. See the LinuxToday notice."
← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)
just let me run out and get an extra terabyte of ram or so, so I can use it! GMC still works just damn fine.
Shift happens. Fire it up.
Will Linux users be able to figure that out?
They were very confused when Microsoft introduced that feature 6 years ago!
Mandrake 8.0 and 8.1 trashed the GMC MIME setting editor. Why would I use GMC? Could it be that Nautilus makes a 1.3GHz Athlon with 512MB of DDR act like a 486 running Windows 2000 professional with 4MB of RAM?
Sure it's purty, but GEEEAWD is it slow.
damn I have 384mb of ram and a Pentium II 450 and it kills my streaming internet radio download speed, slows the system to a crawl, and this is in GNOME. With KDE it's like a faster Windows 2000. Damn ram is cheap though, too bad computer chips are still under 10,000GHZ or I would download this program right away.
Being a KDE fan, I don't use Gnome, but I check up on it every so often to see if it's reached a state where I might convert - not because I don't like KDE, just that I like to keep my options open and use the desktop which best suits me.
Trouble is, the last couple of times I tried to run Gnome, Nautilus would appear to lock up completely for 30+ seconds at a time.
I don't know why and haven't been interested enough in Gnome to find out why yet. I'll probably give it another try now though, see if it works yet.
A full list of changes can be found here
He who defends everything, defends nothing. -- Fredrick The Great
Performance, if you ask me, has to be their #1 priority. There may be fewer bugs, but bugs in software I don't use due to bad performance doesn't affect me any. I have a 1.4Ghz/512MB system and it remains significantly too slow for me to use productively.
I can't help but think of Mozilla about this time last year. It was horridly slow. And the typical tune on slashdot was something like "Mozilla is so slow it's useless garbage! They should scrap it all and start over." And now the tune has changed, and the general opinion about Mozilla is very positive. Given that, maybe in a year or two Nautilus will pick up in performance and reach a state of usability. I hope, anyway!
I can't say myself if Nautilus is really much slower because I haven't used it myself. If anyone has used it, can you post your observations here?
Cheers,
Jason.
For one (the feature made for me but it doesn't work with .ogg) it allows you to do a mouseover on a .mp3 file and it plays it, when you take the mouse cursor off the .mp3 file it stops playing it.
.ogg support and the speed problem is fixed I will use Gnome and Nautilus more. I think the thing here is they got the ideas working, now the code has to be optimized.
At least that's how it worked with redhat 6.2. Now I have 7.1 and the latest official Ximian desktop and that don't work anymore for some reason. Perhaps a Redhat 7.2/ and a NEW Ximian Gnome would suffice.
If I can get that working with
seems like many of the speed improvments lie in the fact that they are now caching everything or removing certain abilities (like checking for a smaller set of extentions) is this the correct way to make speed improvments? I mean really, reducing functionality can hardly be though of as a speed improvment... so now If i want to search for an icon that happens to be an unpre-defined extinsion ill prolly have to find it myself...bah, do it the right way (code corretly) second, caching everything is a quick fix, but wait for people to shout "it doesnt run with 64 meg ram!!"
I SURVIVED THE GREAT SLASHDOT BLACKOUT OF 2002!
Seems to be updating everything without a hitch... good speeds too.
I'm not a troll!
Anyone know of some screen shots of the new release? I haven't seen a recent version running, just wondering what it looks like.
If you want speed, use SCSI, better yet SCSI raid.
Nautilus runs as fast as Windows does in IDE mode when running on SCSI.
If you use Linux, please help development of Autopac
Prepare to lose all karma...
Perhaps I'm alone... I love GNOME, but I really don't care for Nautilus. In fact, I sort of have a strong distaste for it. But I have to give Andy and company from Eazel credit for taking a risk and for following their dreams. They've made a product that's loved by many... just not me.
I understand Quanitify originated as a *nix product... it also costs over a thousand bucks. Are there any OSS tools that match TrueTime, Quantify, etc. for usability and features?
Similarly, are there any OSS tools that correspond to BoundsChecker (NuMega) or Purify (Rational)? I'm aware of ElectricFence and other utilities that are primarily geared towards memory management issues; I'm wondering if there are any more comprehensive tools available.
(No, this is not a troll, and yes, I do know how to usee Google, thank you. I've got a genuine interest in the topic, and thought I'd be lazy about it for once and ask people for recommendations before doing my own research.)
Or, we could save lots of money on a SCSI drive/card and simply use Konqueror.
Get SCSI raid and have 64 megs of ram and it runs fast.
If you use Linux, please help development of Autopac
I ran Nautilus 1.0 on a 10,000 RPM 80MB/sec LVD SCSI RAID-5 (video workstation) and found it to be horrible.
Even when it wasn't accessing the disk it was munching CPU time like nothing else. I hope it's improved since 1.0.
STOP . AMERICA . NOW
I use 1.03 but still you are talking about 1.0!!!!
Geez use the version released in the past 6 months
If you use Linux, please help development of Autopac
Yeah, swapping to ide can be a bit of a bottleneck :)
Yeah right. If you're trying to make a file manager suitable for the masses you had better make it run tolerably on the masses' hardware. They all have IDE and could care less about what you think.
A Government Is a Body of People, Usually Notably Ungoverned
Come on.. Nautilus is faster on a SCSI drive/card, but both Internet Explorer and Konqueror kick Nautilus in terms of performance on an IDE drive.
Don't you see something wrong with that?
This is a joke, right?
You've posted at least three times that people complaining about Nautilus' speed (or lack thereof) should ditch their IDE drives and go to SCSI.
You might want to jump a little, I'm gonna throw some basic logic at you.
If the Windows file manager runs as fast on IDE as Nautilus does on SCSI, you can make two conclusions: (1) SCSI is not any faster than IDE, and Nautilus is just slower than the Windows FM. (2) SCSI is faster than IDE, and Nautilus is a lot slower than the Windows FM.
Either way, you're not helping your case.
While we're on the subject, you might want to consider that if only one device on the controller is speaking, SCSI has no real advantage over IDE. That means for most desktop systems, which only have one hard drive, IDE is perfectly sufficient and a hell of a lot cheaper. Do your own research: here's the first link I found at google on the subject.
So drop your ridiculous SCSI fetish and recognize that Nautilus is just slow (even according to your own damned post).
both Apple and the former Eazel hackers need to be taught that too much eye candy is not a good thing and generally pisses everyone off.
It's all about the performance bay-bee!
in recent versions, they toned down the CPU usage in return for slower IO access.
as a result, you have Nautilus displaying a 100 file dir. in 1 min, but using 5% of CPU, while IE does it in 10 seconds, using 5% of CPU.
Yeah, this is what the Linux Desktop movement needs. Just go out and buy expensive hardware and it will be fine!
Yes, the average desktop NEEDS a SCSI RAID controller just to use poorly written code that needs to be compiled on each system.
Take your meds, get a real job supporting a profitable company and then tell me how great it is.
Give some consideration to the reality of supporting applications and systems in a business environment before you post comments that fail to account for sound economic and engineering decision-making principles.
It's good to use efficient algorithms, but big-O analysis is rarely the only concern with real-world code.
(I haven't read a whit of Nautilus code. I tried it on my parents' -- midrange -- machine several months ago and immediately moved them back to GMC.)
how to invest, a novice's guide
I get the impression that you think n^2 strictly refers to sorting algorithms or something. n^2 can refer to a measure of any algorithm's efficiency, and from what I can see in the change log, this case has nothing to do with sorting. [FYI, this may also be written in Big-Oh notation, as in O(n^2) (although note that O(n^2) is not necessarily equivalent to n^2).]
And yes, sometimes n^2 is needed. Sometimes x^n is needed, and sometimes even n! is unavoidable. Maybe you ought to revisit those computer science texts. :)
Jason.
Nautilus is the biggest pig in the pen. It's slow on GHz+ machines with fast drives and plenty of RAM.
GMC is plenty zippy, but they seem to have abandoned it and broken the MIME editor.
That's why I switched to KDE....
I am really disappointed in this release. I finished compiling it and ran it, and it about the same speed if not slower than 1.0.4! The nautilus developers should aim to make Nautilus FAST. I don't care about the eye candy, I like my computer to be a tool.
I really think that some people should really extend GMC for some of the features Nautilus implements, such as file previews, and make GMC the default again!
I'm not even going to try installing this thing because i know its going to require about 50 supporting libraries to be downloaded just to get it to run.
I gots ta ding a ding dang my dang a long ling long
You run an extremely powerful fancy GUI on a Pentium 4 1ghz on an IDE slow harddrive?!?!?!?!?!
If the damned program chews up enough memory that it has to eat into swap on any of my systems, it's out the window.
In fact, on the laptop I'm typing this on right now, I have turned off the swap drive. My desktop needs should never need more than 256M of memory, ever.
Yes I understand disk access can be slow but that's what the linux cache is all about. I don't have any trouble with Konqueror, Opera or even that pig of an OS...er...browser, Mozilla. If Nautilus hits the drive more than Moz, it's broken, and no amount of you bitching about my IDE drive is going to speed it up.
Yeah, it's the raid that does it. /rolls eyes
Use a package manager that follows dependencies. Of course that will require someone to package it and post it. Nevermind, it will be 10 months before it makes the debian tree. Then again they probably consider it non-free for some religious reason.
Long live pkg_add -r!
Back to sleep......
Comparing it to Windows will be a moot point, since El Dorado is going to have a 40% larger code base than XP.
I don't find Nautilus slow on my Athlon700 system-not exactly a screamer by todays standards. When running Gnome it opens up in a couple seconds. In KDE it takes three times as long to start but once running I don't notice any lags. I dunno, maybe I'm too use to Windows.
Love that Slashdot editing.
I just want a simple program that I can browse through my files with, I use roz sure it's not skinnable and it doesn't have neato icons or browse the web but it does what I want it to without hogging resources.
And yes I have an older computer a P2 350 with 448 MB of ram ( I'm a RAM junkie, hell it's cheap enough!)everything else I use runs great ok ok well Mozilla isin't the fastest but it works.
Snoozer.
Nautilus is slow when first installed. most of the themes which come with the package don't help matters. they have too much eye candy and slow it down tremendously. with plain-type buttons, folders and background nautilus is usable and even moderately fast. my problems have been with freezing. and other bugs...
I did a quick speed analysis in the loading of a directory with 2870 mp3 with Nautilus (1.0.5), Konqueror (2.2.1), and Windows Explorer (XP).
all 3 apps were already running, but never visited directory before (so no caching). test done on athlon 800 with 256 mb ram. Everything was set to order by name.
Windows Explorer - loaded new window and loaded files almost instantenously.
Konqueror - open new window was instant.. loading files took about 4 seconds.
Nautilus(icon view) - open new window was instant.. loading files took 28 seconds, 4 more seconds for the GUI to finish layouting.
nautilus (music view) - still loading, has been over 10 mins, gui usable, but the view part isn't (using bonobo?). incomparision, xmms, winamp, and noatun load metadata from mp3s much faster.
looks like nautilus is 32 times slower than Windows Explorer. Much optimization has to be done!
Except automatic background bad sector location and mapping out.
(just to pointlessly fan the flames)
Who needs RAID when you can fit your entire disk into buffers/cache?
Invalid form key: RSzsQ8xzZ9 !
If you this error seems to be incorrect, please provide the following in your report to SourceForge:
* Browser type
* User ID/Nickname or AC
* What steps caused this error
* Whether or not you know your ISP to be using a proxy or some sort of service that gives you an IP that others are using simultaneously.
* How many posts to this form you successfully submitted during the day
* Please choose 'formkeys' for the category!
Thank you.
Hi!
Sorry, I am running Windows XP, ntot win2k. I did not have indexing turn on.
jiango richard huang
Pijemo, pijemo, pijemo, pijemo PIVO! :)
Bog!
Since 1.3 nautilus has been fast enough and roswell2/1.05 is nice
Microsoft(tm) - a particular virulent virus that has infected most Pc's.
Windowmaker is like the girl next door that you keep coming back to because she's the perfect balance. Gnome is like the horny divorcee who's desperate for company and tries in vain to make herself look good. KDE is the preppy bitch cheerleader who requires way too much upkeep to keep happy. KDE also runs with a different crowd, calling themselves QTs, who are convinced of their own superiority.
And Opera kicks Konquerer's ass. As long as I'm pissing off the eyecandy freaks, I'll piss off the purity zealots too.
For what its worth, I think that nautilus is a great product. Is it a bit slower than exporer, sure, but it is not as if you were getting nothing back for it (everything is so smooth :) Anyway, thanks alot nautilus team!
winey little bitch
There is a little ways to come on speed optimisation, but at the rate things have been progressing, 1.0.6 could be the killer release. god do i love things like the emblems and SVG icons :)
If your'e still using GMC, try Nautilus for awhile - it will grow on you (please, clever punster wags, control yourselves).
I especially like the ability to have remote FTP file systems integrated with the file manager alongside local storage, so I can cut a file from local drive and just paste it into an FTP site. Can't wait till they get SMB file shares and other filesystems added to it as well.
Combine this with the bookmarks feature and you have a very efficient way of managing remote and local files transparently. It's worth a few seconds startup time IMHO.
pr0n - keeping monitor glass spotless since 1981.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
As good a reason for an IP ban as has ever been seen here.
Hmm, yup, I fail to see how a graphics heavy file manager which mostly concerns itself with arranging and drawing icons on the screen can possibly significantly benefit from a switch from ATA133 to SCSI drives.
Clearly a SCSI fetish, a subculture very similar in many ways to the arrogant audiofiles who insist everyone spend $10,000 per speaker to listen to their vinyl collection.
Nautilus runs as fast as Windows
does in IDE mode when running on SCSI.
This is a joke, right?
I do not believe he would have written
it that way unless he meant for it to be serious.
I believe you are anti-scsi. It may be because
you are still using a 286, or maybe you are
jealous that he has scsi and that you don't.
Either way, he has his own preferrences, and
you have yours. Get off his case.
You've posted at least three times that people
complaining about Nautilus' speed (or lack thereof)
should ditch their IDE drives and go to SCSI.
Perhaps this guy prefers scsi, and you don't.
Or perhaps he is making a valid point. IDE is
only so many wires, and scsi has so many more.
Plus with the ability to put up to 15 drives
on there, you can find someones old 500 meg
scsi drive that they will give you, and give
yourself another page file or some other use
for it, without saying "You know, I can't really use
that drive, I already have 4 drives hooked up
to my eide controller", assuming that you do
not use raid. I believe you may be in love with eide,
or even ide, because you may not yet have the
capabilities of eide. Who knows?
You might want to jump a little, I'm
gonna throw some basic logic at you.
AHHH..
If the Windows file manager runs as fast
on IDE as Nautilus does on SCSI, you can make
two conclusions: (1) SCSI is not any faster
than IDE, and Nautilus is just slower than the
Windows FM. (2) SCSI is faster than IDE, and
Nautilus is a lot slower than the Windows FM.
SCSI IS FASTER THAN IDE AND EIDE!!! Any A+
certified technician can tell you this. Even my
little 13 year old brother can tell you this.
Let me call him in here, I will tell you what he and
I talked about...
Hi brother.
Hi
Which is faster EIDE, or SCSI
SCSI is
So you see, it would be of great advantage to know more
than my 13 year old brother does.
Either way, you're not helping your case.
While we're on the subject, you might want to
consider that if only one device on the
controller is speaking, SCSI has no real
advantage over IDE. That means for most desktop
systems, which only have one hard drive, IDE is
perfectly sufficient and a hell of a lot
cheaper. Do your own research: here's the first
link [acc.umu.se] I found at google on the subject.
I would assume that if you have scsi, you have more
than one drive connected. So this argument is way
down the tubes already. Ha.
So drop your ridiculous SCSI fetish and recognize
that Nautilus is just slow (even according to your
own damned post).
If you were to put it on a decent processor,
and by decent, I mean anything over 486 dx2, you
would probably be doing better. Hmm.... or maybe
you just don't know how to set it up. Who knows?
Quite honestly, I do not even want to attempt to
set up nautilus, but I have heard great things
about it. You are just jealous of the guy
because he knows more than you do. Either that,
or you just posted because you felt like it. If
you could keep this down to a smaller amount,
then it would probably be better for the
servers.
Nothing a file manager does can possibly take n^2. Sorting is the most complex thing it does, and even junior high school kids have that down to n*logn
This story reminds me of what I have thought for quite some time now... the fact that Linux is never going to succeed on the desktop. There are too many factions at work for it to succeed. There are too many Window Managers. Competition is a good thing, I'm all for it, but we (the people still waiting to use Linux as a desktop OS) don't need 87 different GUI file managers. For the most part the GUI file manager competition is irrelevant anyway, how can anyone compete with "free". Who wins in the end anyway, the file manager with the most what?
Konqueror and GMC both work great. Why not program something worthwhile, like a good game or something? Linux games are severely lacking. Sure, I can play thousands of roms on Linux, and Loki even has some good titles out, but where's my Diablo? or Diablo II? And if you say Wine or VMWare, you lose a testicle! Emulation and virtual this-or-that sucks in the performance realm and you know it!
I use Nautilus on my own computer and it's perfectly usable. Yet my computer is already two years old. My configuration: PIII 600, 256Mo RAM, IDE drive, Redhat 7.1 and Ximian Gnome.
Sometime, Nautilus start to use lots of CPU when starting. Killing it and restarting it solves the problem.
I hope this program will continue to get better and better.
I'm curious as to what aspects of Nautilus you find so distateful. I wouldn't have thought that it could elicit such strong feelings.
With hindsight, it was probably a bad idea to choose a company name only two letters away from Edsel.
(Or Etzel which is German for Edsel... == Attila, BTW.)
-- Ed Avis ed@membled.com
You might want to jump a little, I'm gonna throw some basic logic at you.
If the Windows file manager runs as fast on IDE as Nautilus does on SCSI, you can make two conclusions: (1) SCSI is not any faster than IDE, and Nautilus is just slower than the Windows FM. (2) SCSI is faster than IDE, and Nautilus is a lot slower than the Windows FM.
Is that what you call logic?
I do not see any sane way that from the premise "the Windows file manager runs as fast on IDE as Nautlius does on SCSI" that you could possibly conclude "SCSI is not any faster than IDE, and Nautlius is just slower than the Windows FM". If SCSI is no faster than IDE and Nautlius is slower than the Windows FM then logically you would expect Nautilus to run slower on IDE than the Windows FM does on IDE, which is incompatible with your opening premise.
Your second alternative conclusion is a valid possibility given the premise though.
If SCSI is no faster than IDE and Nautlius is slower than the Windows FM then logically you would expect Nautilus to run slower on IDE than the Windows FM does on IDE
Meant to say "...slower on SCSI than the Windows FM does on IDE", obviously.
I can't understand why anyone likes this software. Is bloated, slow and not THAT functional. are people just happy with any GUI filemanager that pops up for linux? Nautilus is a joke and I wish it died with its company.
Thanks for the code. I posted it over at Yahoo! bastardized message boards for someone looking for the MS CD cracking software.
What's with the ever evolving state of file managers for linux? Besides thumbnail view and an embedded audio player MS has had the same file manageer since 1995 and it works fine. Only now with XP does it look even slightly different. Yet the linux ones want to be web browsers etc and can't even do that right. A file manager should do one thing, manage files. These "file managers" are constantly changing and can never settle on a feature set. Talk about feature creap. It slices, it dices, it does ftp,http, nfs, smb, blah, blah. Did you know the "desktop" audience the linux community thinks it deserves for the most part does not even know how to use a file manager? They just use file->save as to put the file where they want.
There are soo many more important issues for the linux desktop than a SUPER file manager. How about the linux commmunity spend a few years making or copying there OWN GOOD LOOKING FONTS? I can't imagine it could take as long as Gnome has and would truly benefit the community as a whole as opposed to a bloated file manager. The linux community for all their push behind open standards has none when it comes to the linux desktop. Linux hackers do what Feels good and as a result you have a bunch of patch work windows managers that fight with each other and need P500's with 256MB ram to run O.K.
I'm sure I just don't "get it" but it seems to me that simple and stable seem to be the future for Computer desktops, and linux is way off track.
I wonder what the role of nautilus is? It is not a very good file browser, it can't browse tar-archives like its predecessor midnight commander could. You can not drag images from thumbnail mode into another window to get it displayed. It is not a very good browser either, you can't for instance drag links to another window, no image control, no "open new window on middle mouse click".
The playing of sound files by just pointing at them is neat, but doesn't work in 1.0.5 for me (it did in 1.0.4).
I think it is strange that Gnome replaced MC with something that can't even do all the stuff MC did. And as a web broswer it is not up to galeon or mozilla or konqurer. If one wants to be sarcastic one could say that they took two programs, MC and mozilla, integrated them and in the process removed a lot of useful stuff. The eye-candy is impressive for about two minutes, but then what?
Nautilus seems to be stuck in this not-ok-file-manager-not-ok-browser state.
I'm no big fan of KDE but at least konqurer is an ok filemanager and an ok browser. Nautilus is not really usable in any role.
Nautilus is faster hands down.
I have windowsXP and nautilus on my computer, 400mhz pentium, SCSI drive, 256 megs of ram.
Nautilus runs much faster than XP, Gnome runs faster, Enlightenment runs faster in fact windowsXP is the slowest OS i've ever used in my life.
Nautilus is competiting against XP.
Let people who want a good file manager upgrade their hardware, isnt that the point of buying new hardware? to run the most powerful software?
If you use Linux, please help development of Autopac
Windows XP is even slower than nautilus!!!
If you use Linux, please help development of Autopac
The average user who just checks their email and surfs the web has no need for a good machine.
Thats why these new computers arent selling.
Force them to buy new machines, computer sales pick up and we have jobs again!
If you use Linux, please help development of Autopac
So now you have the premise: Nautilus on SCSI and Windows' FM on IDE are equally fast, while Nautilus is slower on IDE than Windows' FM on IDE.
Now, if SCSI is not faster than IDE, then the hardware difference is not a defining factor of the software's performance. Therefore, there must be some reason other than the IDE/SCSI difference for Nautilus running slower than the Windows FM on IDE while the performance remains equal with Nautilus/SCSI and Windows/IDE. Your best case scenario, then, is that Nautilus and Windows' FM perform equally well, and the Windows FM does not in any case run more slowly than Nautilus. Therefore, you can reasonably conclude that Nautilus is generally slower than the Windows FM. This is my first of two possible conclusions.
Better?
Eazel went out of business because they had a shitty business model. But their flagship project lives on and may be a success yet. So what does this matter?
It shows consumers that open source projects are not tied to the success of their parent companies. This is extremely important when it comes to the ASP businesses. My message to them is: escrow your code or open it up if you want my business. I want to make sure that if an ASP I contract with goes under, I still maintian access to MY data.
LedgerSMB: Open source Accounting/ERP
For a long time I stuck to GMC as my desktop manager, because I figured someone had to run it if we planned on keeping people with small systems happy (there are a lot of under powered machines out of the US).
I finally made the switch because of the simplicity and cleanliness of Nautilus. I did not like Nautilus 1.0, I felt there were too many taste differences between my way of working and Nautilus way of working.
But the Nautilus hackers were quick to respond to the input of the user community, and by the time Nautilus 1.0.3 came out, they had addressed most of the community issues.
Today people are using Nautilus in really creative ways, and I finally made the switch because of all this creativity. Tuomas has a `magnets' package for his desktop and a set of images to play free-form solitaire on the desktop. Sure, they are just toys, but like that there are hundreds of other things being done with Nautilus.
The core foundation in Nautilus is sound, and a lot of people are doing really creative things. For example someone wrote a "3D" viewer for directories. You can at any point switch your default view into 3D-view inside the window. It is just a Bonobo component, you do not even need to touch the Nautilus code to add these third-party views.
Some other people have been writing Nautilus scripts, and I have been using a few of them. They could use some polish, but for being user-contributed things, they are pretty nice.
I also noticed that the new Windows XP shell incorporated various ideas that were in Nautilus or earlier versions of Nautilus and some others were demoed as concepts by Andy as potential services to consumers.
I would like to extend's Andy's idea of "actions" that are available on the left pane to be more comprehensive as it is on XP.
Other features in Nautilus are its support for SVG-icons. Something that has been overlooked for some time. I did not knew about this until I saw someone's desktop with these huge icons (common used things were huge, others were there just for reference). Those huge icons looked perfect (maybe they were 100x100 size), when I asked I found out that it was the new Tuomas/Jakub set of SVG icons.
Many hackers have been using pictures of themselves as their desktop "home". For example Nat's personal home directory has a `Friends' directory, and each `Friends' folder has a high resolution picture of his friends, where he keeps his information. He has a picture of his car for details about his car. Maybe he can post a screenshot of his desktop so you get an idea.
There are many more creative uses of Nautilus out there, but I have to say that as the product matures, more and more options are available.
But Nautilus overall makes for a terrific file manager, but it takes some time to get the best out of it.
I still want to see some of Andy's experimental code that allowed live objects to be shown in Nautilus. At some point I saw someone's desktop contain various "web sites" in a folder. Instead of using an RSS feed, various mini-web sites (fully functional) were embedded into a directory. I wish someone could send me a link to this url.
Miguel.
I wholehartedly expected Nautilus to disappear once Eazel went under. It is a testament to the power of Open Source for another major release to come out despite the death of the sponsoring company. Go Linux!
lot SLOWER than konqueror and IE on my computer!!!!!!!!
using 1.0.4
And Opera kicks Konquerer's ass.
I guess you are speaking about rendering speed, right?
Yes, Opera renders simple HTML faster than Konqueror. But it comes at the expense of quality. Opera's DOM/JavaScript is very poor. CSS support is incomplete and somewhat misleading.
Anyway, Opera is very good for *easy* sites, which were designed to run in Netscape 4.75 or even in Netscape 3. You can go to such sites and still get adecuate results.
In contrast, Konq was designed to run on much bigger number of sites, and has excellent CSS2 and adequate DOM support
More info at: www.konqueror.org
KDE. KDE Themes. KDE News. Visit http://kde2.newmail.ru
yes, I always figured it was slow only because Mozilla was god awful slow at the time. That was back before releases of mozilla which suddenly made it ten times faster. Do you know whether or not Nautilus is still slow now that Mozilla is fast?