> I recently started looking at gnome2.12 builds (moving on to 2.13 now) and
> I just can't get my head around the default view for Nautilus - the
> spatial view (a new window for each folder opened) is so annoying ;)
Thanks for raising this, I've been procrastinating, because I know it's a
Hi,
I didn't mean to open a can of worms ;) The only reason I posted was
because quite a few users have asked me recently why the default is
spatial, all of whom don't like it. Maybe they have to get used to it
but personally think this feature doesn't endear itself to most point
and click users.
> In the next version of the Novell Linux Desktop, we will definitely be
> using browser mode by default -- and we'll default to having the sidepane
> on, too.
Which side pane will you be using by default - tree or places?
- Jeff
--
linux.conf.au 2006: Dunedin, New Zealand http
Hi Jeff,
On Thu, 2005-12-22 at 02:26 +1100, Jeff Waugh wrote:
> * Ubuntu has switched to browse mode by default
And this I very much regret.
I, for one, did not understand why Breezy did ship with that crippled
"ubuntu-nautilus" option set to "on" by default inside the schema, that
closed the
> I, for one, did not understand why Breezy did ship with that crippled
> "ubuntu-nautilus" option set to "on" by default inside the schema, that
> closed the parent windows behind, breaking my work flow without letting me
> know (apart from digging into Ubuntu's bugzilla and the changelog for th
> > Which side pane will you be using by default - tree or places?
>
> Places.
Cool. We're doing the same, and that appears to be the upstream default in
browser mode. I'd love to see this as the default in 2.14.
- Jeff
--
linux.conf.au 2006: Dunedin, New Zealand http://linux.c
On Thu, 2005-12-22 at 02:26 +1100, Jeff Waugh wrote:
> I strongly agree that we should ship browser mode by default,
> especially now
> that it has been so wonderfully refreshed (as of 2.12). I raised this
> during
> my talk at GUADEC. I'm very glad that in this instance we've been
> willing to
> t
Jeff Waugh wrote:
Which side pane will you be using by default - tree or places?
Places.
Cool. We're doing the same, and that appears to be the upstream default in
browser mode. I'd love to see this as the default in 2.14.
Totally agree :)
For general purpose use, the browser is a muc
> Not quite, the theory is good, but the implementation is lacking in
> details. What made the MacOS spatial finder great was:
... and yet users will still ask: "What are all these windows doing all over
my screen?" -> *that* is the big scary thing staring them right in the face.
> PS: Broken m
Hi,
On Thu, 2005-12-22 at 03:19 +1100, Jeff Waugh wrote:
>
> > Ubuntu, as a packager, has all the rights of changing the default
> > settings; on the other hand, I don't think that upstream behaviour should
> > change, unless *every* GNOME packager decides to ship with browser mode by
> > defaul
> If Topaz is moving toward a more comprehensive definition of "first
> class citizen" of the desktop, I think that the overall user experience
> will benefit from a widespread spatial paradigm.
I think it's an important physiological aspect to consider when writing
software, but I don't think t
Hi Jeff,
Jeff Waugh wrote:
... and yet users will still ask: "What are all these windows doing all over
my screen?" -> *that* is the big scary thing staring them right in the face.
So, this gets to the heart of the question. In spatial mode this
situation can only occur if the user commonly
On Thu, 2005-12-22 at 03:43 +1100, Jeff Waugh wrote:
>
>
> > Not quite, the theory is good, but the implementation is lacking in
> > details. What made the MacOS spatial finder great was:
>
> ... and yet users will still ask: "What are all these windows doing all over
> my screen?" -> *that* is
> So, this gets to the heart of the question. In spatial mode this
> situation can only occur if the user commonly uses lots of directories, or
> deeply nested ones.
>
> Is this the most common scenario for our target user?
One of our target users is the kind of person who works in a company,
Hi Jeff,
Op Thu, 22 Dec 2005 04:10:42 +1100, schreef Jeff Waugh:
> etc. On *so* many occasions (and I don't think this is news to anyone), I
> have seen massive trees of categorised folders with all kinds of documents
> in them, often a shared resource on a file server, which users navigate
> th
Shane O'Connor wrote:
I didn't mean to open a can of worms ;) The only reason I posted was
because quite a few users have asked me recently why the default is
spatial, all of whom don't like it.
In all fairness, do you expect that the ones who like spatial would ask
why browser isn't default?
Hi,
On Wed, 2005-12-21 at 16:57, William Jon McCann wrote:
> Hi Jeff,
>
> Jeff Waugh wrote:
> > ... and yet users will still ask: "What are all these windows doing all over
> > my screen?" -> *that* is the big scary thing staring them right in the face.
>
> So, this gets to the heart of the ques
On Wed, 2005-12-21 at 18:32, Pat Suwalski wrote:
> Shane O'Connor wrote:
> > I didn't mean to open a can of worms ;) The only reason I posted was
> > because quite a few users have asked me recently why the default is
> > spatial, all of whom don't like it.
>
> In all fairness, do you expect that
Le mercredi 21 décembre 2005 à 17:03 +0100, Emmanuele Bassi a écrit :
> the nautilus package) what the hell happenend. *This*, for me, was a
> major flaw for Breezy; a flaw that reflected onto GNOME itself.
Your are probably speaking of the modified spatial for hoary ...
Cheers,
Sebastien Ba
Shane O'Connor wrote:
In all fairness, do you expect that the ones who like spatial would ask
why browser isn't default?
Perhaps, but in all the time we had browser as the default I never once
heard anyone complain about it or ask why we couldn't have spatial mode
as default.
Sir, your histo
On Thu, 2005-12-22 at 14:20, Pat Suwalski wrote:
> Shane O'Connor wrote:
> >>In all fairness, do you expect that the ones who like spatial would ask
> >>why browser isn't default?
> >
> > Perhaps, but in all the time we had browser as the default I never once
> > heard anyone complain about it or
On Wed, 2005-12-21 at 17:04 +, Bastien Nocera wrote:
> On Thu, 2005-12-22 at 03:43 +1100, Jeff Waugh wrote:
> >
> >
> > > Not quite, the theory is good, but the implementation is lacking in
> > > details. What made the MacOS spatial finder great was:
> >
> > ... and yet users will still ask:
Hi,
On Thu, 2005-12-22 at 03:56 +1100, Jeff Waugh wrote:
>
>
> > If Topaz is moving toward a more comprehensive definition of "first
> > class citizen" of the desktop, I think that the overall user experience
> > will benefit from a widespread spatial paradigm.
>
> I think it's an important ph
On 12/23/05, Eric Larson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Spatial mode nautilus does not address the massive amounts of data that
> computers can (and should) work with. Browser mode emulates a web
> browser, which is a proven interface for handling huge amounts of data.
Oh, yeah, the 'net. THE user i
Hi,
On Fri, 2005-12-23 at 08:38, Eric Larson wrote:
> Yet, users have also been exposed to the world wide web (which I doubt
> anyone would argue has not been successful reaching critical mass) and
> learned to handle massive amounts of data using hypertext.
>
> Browser mode emulates a web
> bro
Hi,
On Fri, 2005-12-23 at 03:38 -0500, Eric Larson wrote:
> Hi,
> The point here is choosing the right tool for the job is critical.
> Spatial mode nautilus does not address the massive amounts of data that
> computers can (and should) work with. Browser mode emulates a web
> browser, which is a
Kalle Vahlman wrote:
It may be better for hierarchies but that is not how you can manage
_massive_ amounts of data anyway.
Tag & search looks to me as the most valid management model, but there
is not a mode or integrated support for that (yet).
Thats correct and thats why some of us (namely
On 22 Dec, 2005, at 5:38 AM, Bastien Nocera wrote:
...
Not quite, the theory is good, but the implementation is lacking in
details. What made the MacOS spatial finder great was:
1. integration with the "window manager" (Modifier+Close would close
all the parent windows, including or excluding th
On 22 Dec, 2005, at 6:30 AM, Reinout van Schouwen wrote:
...
Op Thu, 22 Dec 2005 04:10:42 +1100, schreef Jeff Waugh:
etc. On *so* many occasions (and I don't think this is news to
anyone), I have seen massive trees of categorised folders with all
kinds of documents in them, often a shared res
On 12/23/05, Matthew Paul Thomas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Spatial memory applies to the icons within windows, not just to the
> windows themselves. But that's not useful where the number of items in
> a single folder is so great that scrolling prevents you from having any
> spatial memory for m
Hi,
> > The point here is choosing the right tool for the job is critical.
> > Spatial mode nautilus does not address the massive amounts of data that
> > computers can (and should) work with. Browser mode emulates a web
> > browser, which is a proven interface for handling huge amounts of data.
--- Eric Larson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Just to add to this aspect...
>
> Users often associate documents with applications.
I happen to use and like spatial nautilus very much.
However, one point in favor of the new browser
nautilus is that the new browser nautilus looks much
like th
2005/12/21, Jeff Waugh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> I strongly agree that we should ship browser mode by default, especially now
> that it has been so wonderfully refreshed (as of 2.12). I raised this during
> my talk at GUADEC. I'm very glad that in this instance we've been willing to
> take a risk, bu
On Fri, 23 Dec 2005, Eric Larson wrote:
> Yet, users have also been exposed to the world wide web (which I doubt
> anyone would argue has not been successful reaching critical mass) and
> learned to handle massive amounts of data using hypertext.
I would hardly call using a browser to look for so
On 12/26/05, Chipzz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I would hardly call using a browser to look for something in http fol-
> ders "convenient". It lacks for example an easy and consistent way to go
> one directory up (and no, clicking on a hyperlink is hardly "consistent".
> Not when there could be an
35 matches
Mail list logo
