Slashdot Mirror
Ars Technica Looks At GNOME 2.6 [updated]
The Original Yama writes "Ars Technica takes a look inside the GNOME 2.6 Desktop & Developer Platform, due for release any minute now. It builds upon an earlier review of the GNOME 2.5 development series and their own examination of GNOME 2.4."
darthcamaro writes "internetnews.com is running a story about the release of GNOME 2.6 today. They actually got a hold of Miguel de Icaza who had some real interesting stuff to say about it and the Linux Desktop in general. 'de Icaza told internetnews.com that a simpler interface has been the goal of GNOME since at least version 2.0.'" Update: 03/31 21:59 GMT by T : sn0wman3030 was one of many submitters to link to the GNOME 2.6 start page, including links to screenshots, documentation, and source downloads.
I am a Mac OS X user and I have to say that I think that the UI of Gnome is appealing. If I was still using NetBSD, I would probably run it. (Hell, maybe I'll install YellowDog Linux and give it a try.)
Doing a search for technica reveals that slashdot links to that site frequently, yet in terms of content they deliver the same kind of news
Slashdot doesn't create content, but just links to articles. Slashdot is a portal; its only content are the user comments. Ars does great work and their articles are their content. Their stuff is definitely "News For Nerds. Stuff That Matters."
Oh...for that you go to the "File Management" preferences and set "Text Beside Icons".
You could also turn on "Compact Layout", but that's pretty ugly.
:wq
run:
/apps/nautilus/preferences/always_use_browser
:)
gconf-editor
goto
enable this option
"If set to true, then all Nautilus windows will be browser windows. This is how Nautilus used to behave before version 2.6, and some people prefer this behavior. "
you get the old nautilus back by default
Most people have difficulty understanding the file system and how to find their information. I'm constantly amazed at how many people, for instance, do not even realise their files are laid out in a hierarchy on their systems (usually finding out that they've had their system set up for them by a "helpful" "expert" who's turned on browser mode.)
A spacial navigator is one of the few widely used systems that makes file system navigation intuitive. There are several reasons for this.
To begin with, it is immediately obvious that the system is hierarchical. This is not the case with the "browser" metaphor unless "browser" is combined with something else such as Window's File Manager/Explorer tree views on the left. A directory contains other directories (or folders contain other folders), they're not "links".
Secondly it helps with memory. Open a folder and it's where you left it. The icons are where you put them. You remember details like that. It's always easy to find the file you want if you know it's on the bottom left, or top right. You remember instinctively that the folder you just opened is the right one because it appears where you left it. A "browser" environment doesn't do that, you end up traversing through multiple directories that all look the same, and you need to do a fair bit of reading before you know where you are.
The major reason "experts" see it as a problem is because it tends to result in quite a few windows being open. This, really, is pretty trivial compared to the benefits for an inexperienced user. Additionally, better systems make it easy to manage those windows. In Windows, for instance, you can shift-click the close button on a directory window, and it and all the parents will close. Unfortunately this hasn't been replicated elsewhere.
OS/2 used to have this nice system where opening a drive would open a window that represented all the directories on the drive, in a sort of tree view. You could then open up branches of the tree to find the directory you want, and open that window directly.
Macintosh has a neat feature where if you're dragging files around, while you're still holding them you can hover over folders and they'll temporarily open, so you can move them without opening any additional windows.
It sounds to me for the most part a good thing that Nautilus has a spacial mode and that that mode is default. What's needed now is:
- The "experts" need to understand the reasons for it rather than the kneejerk reactions we've seen here.
- It obviously needs tuning. Apple, IBM, and Microsoft have all come up with sensible optimizations to reduce the "lots of windows" burden.
- Improvements in GTK should be considered so that screen space is used more efficiently. More intuitive and automatic workspace management would help (such as the Amiga's launching of apps on new workspaces), the option of top-of-screen menus (which aids muscle memory too) would also help.
It's a good thing. I'm glad they've done it. For once, GNOME is getting ready for the desktop.Next stop: File metadata?
You are not alone. This is not normal. None of this is normal.
The majority of the posts I'm seeing that are 'anti-gnome' stem from the sheer fact that all of you out there are more than just computer users; you are programmers, devleopers, engineers, students, enthusiests, etc. Gnome is not directly targeted toward you.
The Gnome Desktop is very forward looking, as what it does is based on the assumption that Linux On The Desktop will be truely realized one day, and it is preparing to meet the needs of those future (read: not yet existing) Linux users. That isn't to say that Gnome can't be used by any contemporary Linux user with an advanced computer knowledge, it's just not made tailored to you guys. Play around with it. Get to know it a bit more. Then customize to you're liking. Gnome can work however you want it to. That's one of the more beautiful aspects of it.
As for the so-called lack of intuitiveness, this is just plain false. Gnome is as intuitive as a never-used-a-computer computer user can experience (without violating any patents!). Beacuse realistically, the _user_ needs only their home directory with a few sub directories (Documents, Pictures, Music, Movies, etc.). You don't need more than a window or two to manage them. That aforementioned Linux _user_ of the future will appreciate how easy it is to drag and drop between these folders in multiple windows. For the rest of you, it's your duty to discover that parent folder widget as well as the "Browse Folder" option in the right-click menu (i think that's where it is).
In reality, the future linux user (and really all users) will only need to access files as items in a niche program like Rhythmbox or OpenOffice/AbiWord which specifically deal with a particular document type.
I agree that maybe nautilus-cd-burner doesn't jive well anymore. Something along the lines of Mac OS X's 'Burn to CD' radioactive icon is needed somewhere, or something. Thse sorts of things are minor, however, since the Gnome desktop is still not in its future where Linux is mainstream, they still have time to figure out how to manage this issue. In the meantime, chill out, or invest time in compiling k3b.
Slashdot seems to be full of impulsive radicals who vehemently stick to their OS/DE/Apps of choice, and are quick to insult anyone or anything else that's not their favorite. It's a strange sort of application bigotry. Of course, ignorance plays no part in bigotry...
eric http://www.ericdfields.com/
Invariably, my physical desk gets stacked deep with huge piles of papers and other miscellaneous stuff. This sucks because I can't find what I need amongst all of the clutter. My opinion is that this "spatial navigation", or popping up dozens of windows or whatever, is just emulating this undesirable clutter on the computer.
The computer is able to manage navigation very neatly with features such as the back-arrow dropdown list in file managers and browsers. If such a feature were available in the real world, my physical desktop would always be neat and I'd save gobs of time. (Hmm, maybe I should try installing a cafeteria dish stack holder in my desk...)
I don't agree that always trying to emulate the limitations of the real world is a good thing just because the limitations of the real world are more "intuitive".
The right-to-left order is used to MacOS X. As everybody knows, everybody on Slashdot worships MacOS X, and always praise it for being the most userfriendly OS ever.
:/
That aside, GNOME is actively moving away from the "Cancel/No/Yes" button order. They've been doing that for years now if you still haven't noticed.
Instead, buttons now have explicit action verbs, like "Cancel, Don't Save, Save", just like in the much-praised MacOS X.
"but any Windows or KDE user who tries out Gnome will find themselves clicking on the wrong button because Gnome has it backwards."
Which further proves that "Yes/No" is braindead and should be replaced by action verbs.