Slashdot Mirror


Gnome Switches Nautilus Back To Browser Mode

An anonymous reader writes "In one of the do-the-developers-actually-use-their-own-software decisions in the Linux Desktop World, back in 2004 Gnome switched to the 'Spatial' view by default with their Nautilus file manager opening a new window with each new folder viewed. Many derided the decision as poor design or as being different for the sake of being different. Well, after five long years the Gnome powers that be have decided to switch back to browser mode."

6 of 311 comments (clear)

  1. Now for List Mode... by flyingfsck · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Nautilus and most other file browsers also default to Icon view, which is fine if you have only about 5 files on your computer, which was probably true for Windows for Workgroups 3.1, but these days List view should be the default.

    --
    Excuse me, but please get off my Pennisetum Clandestinum, eh!
  2. Corporates in the Gnome Foundation by hebertrich · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Look 5 years ago indeed , in a gnome devel mailing list , we were a bunch to comment on that
    and a few others .. like the dual mode in other file browsers at the time where we have two panes to
    work with. Well .. lo and behold . a devel asked me why one would use a dual pane file manager.
    I gave up on it at that point. I suspect the corporates running the Gnome Foundation have a lot to do
    with most the bad design decisions and the stubbornness at making Gnome bad in general.
    As far as im concerned .. if it takes 5 years to change a bad default .. by 2020 we should perhaps have
    a delete command by default too :) Im cynical yes. But i loved gnome till 1.4 at 2.0 they hosed everything
    that was truly good about it and made it into the lesser desktop. A shame.

    Richard

  3. Re:Nautilus following KDE's Dolphin? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Yes, they have copied the "split view" (one of the killer features of dolphin/konqueror).

    Now Gnome needs to fix the file chooser dialog so that it can 1) have views other than "list view", 2) view generate thumbnails of all kind of files that nautilus can (PDFs, videos, etc) 3) a list view that can order the files by something that is not modification date or size (for example, the type of archive) 4) a list view with BIG icons, not miniatures that are so tiny that you can't tell what picture is in the thumbnail and need a ugly extra panel on the right side of the dialog to show the preview

    The main reason why Gnome can't do all those things is why the file chooser dialog is not a "gnome file chooser dialog", but a "GTK file chooser dialog". The KDE guys don't use the QT file chooser dialog (which exists), they use a KDE file chooser dialog that can use any part of KDE (including parts of konqueror/dolphin) while the gtk dialog can't use nautilus or anything besides the basic GTK building blocks. They have been adding some hacks to avoid the need of writing a decent file chooser, but it still sucks and misses a lot of functionality.

  4. NEWSFLASH by anonieuweling · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Will we get another Slashdot newsflash when they fix the copy/cut situation?
    Please see http://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=47948 for this age old 'unimportant' bug.
    Even the basics take ages for them.

  5. Re:Corporates in the Gnome Foundation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    IMHO it's not 'corporates', it's developer group-think coupled with wilfully ignoring what damn near *everybody* is telling them.

    When this was rolled out, the forums were *filled* with people complaining, people explaining exactly why it was a poor design choice, etc. But this was simply ignored because someone had a nice academic theory about why "spacial was more intuitive". Never mind that it wasn't, and that everyone hated it, and that it wasn't how people were used to computers working. They had a theory! All the users must be wrong!

  6. The futility of HIGs is what it shows by Budenny · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Back in the 80s there was some point in HIGs, and Apple back then was generally felt to lead the way. The reason was that there were, among your users, a very high proportion of new users. So we conflated ease of use with ease of learning, and it was not completely stupid, for much of the market using and learning were the same thing.

    Now however HIGs have become part of the problem rather than part of the solution, because they make the implicit assumption that everyone works in the same way, and has the same basic skills. We just do not. And anyone who experiments a bit with end users will find this out in a flash. I have had people who loved spatial browsing because it might be cluttered, but they always knew where they were. Then there are people who love Gnome and the desktop and love to put all their files all over it where they can see them. And then you have the odd case of some totally non-technical person, who you try out with Fluxbox, and you get the reaction that this is great, this is how I always thought Linux was supposed to be, no clutter and very minimalist and above all fast. It turns out that hand edited menus and the explicit startup of the file manager are actually something some non-technical people welcome and find refreshing. Others of course will run a mile. One size does not fit all.

    The Gnome ideal, that there is such a thing as the right way to set up a desktop, an application, is the problem. There simply is not, and when you take that approach, the penalty is that you inconvenience and impair working for at least one third of the people using it. Far beter to have a few broad choices, and then let people refine within it, and offer some guidelines. If you are not very computer familiar, start out with this, then see if, a while later, you want to move to this, and here is a very minimalist alternative.

    HIGs are a snare and a delusion, very apt that they are sometimes rudely referred to as 'interface fascism'.