Ubuntu Planning To Develop Its Own File Manager

[brosis]

Theming is of secondary importance to Gnome. Deal with it.
Gnome is not intended for users with expectations similar to the expectations of the author of http://felipec.wordpress.com/2013/06...-with-gnome-3/ Deal with it.

To summarize:
Deal with it, move to a desktop environment that suits you, move on.

So when will ability to have custom wallpaper be deprecated??

Also, please read the two posts here.
This is just a part of the iceberg.

[brosis]

i hope not as i hate the classical desktop concepts. they are bad. the only reason people are still sticking to them is because they are used to it.

Not so. They stick to "classical concepts" where everything is a file, because they (people) can overlook and control it.
I have since long ago modified my (classical) desktop to behave within same concepts (not look) like interface in Syndicate Wars.

Also, Ubuntu icon (Shuttleworth desperately wanted it to exactly sit there, this is not an attack on him, just mention) is looking damn close to start button, except the start menu is differently built. Talk "classic interface"...

[Aleve Sicofante]

Nautilus does those very explicitly. So wtf?

Care to show a picture of a Nautilus window with the zoom in/out bar and the list/icons icons?

One thing Apple did get right is that they could design a better UI, being that they are pros, than the user wasting their time configuring every little detail. Android has picked up on this as has Gnome and even Ubuntu and yourself as per the quote. But then you complain about having to use the mouse where you need to use the keyboard + versa vice. You are contradicting yourself. Otherwise you didn't back up your args like how the design ideas are wrong, so they weren't convincing.

You have to be a little more precise... If you want me to explain why most of what I read in Alad Day's blog is bogus, I won't. This is a thread about Nautilus. If you want me to explain why you are forced to move from keyboard to mouse and vice versa, well I won't either: it's just there. Maybe I haven't explained myself, though, so here's it again: you can design a keyboard-only workflow, you can design a mouse-only workflow, you can design both (which is what's best, obviously). What you can't do is design a workflow that's forcing you to use the mouse half of the time and forces you to use the keyboard half of the time. That's wrong. That's what Nautilus has done by basically removing every icon on its decoration. Sure you can go to the cog menu and do things with the mouse there, but that's so clumsy that you better learn to use the keyboard shortcuts. There you are.

I won't comment on Gnome Shell extensions since that's not the topic, but I'd say you're some sort of Unicorn when it comes to that...

[brosis]

Maintain that ancient piece of garbage forever? Hell no! Gnome 2 was the worst part of Ye Olde Ubuntu for me. Sure it was stable, but it was a terrible mouse-driven interface, only close to usable with Compiz. Unity was the only thing that made me upgrade from 9.10.

Unity is a wonderful shell, and it will soon become a wonderful, full DE so we won't have to deal with gnome devs butchering our apps.

Three things:
Gnome2 is easily keyboard driven.
Compiz was and is fully keyboard driven.
Unity uses Compiz.

[ssokolow]

That is an absolute cluster-f of a way to do software development. And you never see it anywhere in any circumstance in any place that does professional software. The users are not beta testers that should be enduring the development process on their systems. They foist this stuff that isn't even half-baked yet onto us and then there's some kind of shock to see that all we can do is bang our heads onto our desks until unconsciousness sets in.



The Linux desktop is broken because just as we begin to reach a stage of product completion and squashing the big bugs, somebody comes along and says, "Great! Let's throw that all out and start over!" The professional way to handle a transition like this is to maintain GNOME2 until GNOME3 is fully developed and ready for public consumption, then you release GNOME 3. You don't just pull the plug on it. Of course Canonical plays a role in this for Ubuntu users since they should have just maintained GNOME2 instead of giving us that broken mess of Unity and asking us to endure all of its brokenness. But when the entire system becomes a trainwreck of dependencies on GTK3 and other GNOME crap, I guess they felt they had to move with GNOME to keep up to date.

JMO. But GNOME is amateur software. Amateur at best.

It's the same nonsense that happened with the GNOME 1.x → 2.x transition. JWZ called it the CADT model.

KDE 3.x → 4.x was no better. Even if you grant that distros took unfair advantage of their lack of a giant flashing "DEVELOPER PREVIEW" warning on early KDE 4 releases, it still took them roughly half-way into the KDE 4 lifecycle to reach feature parity with KDE 3. (and the people I talked to tried to claim that there was nothing wrong with it because KDE 2.x → 3.x went the same way.)

[speculatrix]

I either use XFCE or KDE; the latter particularly when I have a high resolution display and want to be able to tune the sizes of the UI to be the right size. I've stuck with KDE since 3.x, and yes, the early 4.x versions were pretty crap but it's now very solid. It includes all the tools and features you could ask for. Some people say it's ugly but chances are that's just because they don't like the theme chosen by their distro's packagers.

[brosis]

It's the same nonsense that happened with the GNOME 1.x → 2.x transition. JWZ called it the CADT model.

KDE 3.x → 4.x was no better. Even if you grant that distros took unfair advantage of their lack of a giant flashing "DEVELOPER PREVIEW" warning on early KDE 4 releases, it still took them roughly half-way into the KDE 4 lifecycle to reach feature parity with KDE 3. (and the people I talked to tried to claim that there was nothing wrong with it because KDE 2.x → 3.x went the same way.)

Haha! Funny. Thanks for linking that!

So, if to remember how RH behaved in those times, its crystal JWZ just sent the patches in wrong upstream. Should have sent them to "users" cattle, that is RH corporate users, not in what his understanding "users" was - the open bug testers. That put into place, the reaction of Gnome2 is pretty predictable. They had people in places to exactly implement the policy and handle the clueless devs wanting stable desktop...

[DDF420]

Do it support regex? If not I think recoll have a a Unity plugin. Also Kde has a recoll plugin. Also to get regex search for KDE I think you can use nepoogle to search with regex directly in nepomuk database.

libcolumbus https://launchpad.net/libcolumbus and Zeitgeist full text search finds everything i need. It wouldn't be to hard to add a regex search filter and you can easily add the recoll scope if needed.

[V10lator]

If the community is writing the apps they're being exploited, if Canonical is coding the apps indoors they're tirants.

You don't get it, hmm?
If community is writing apps all is fine as long as community doesn't need to sign a CLA that says "we (Canonical) will be the only ones able to relicense the finished product and as such making money with it".
If Canonical is coding indoor all is fine as long as they aren't causing fragmentation at low-level stuff or better solutions already exist.

By the way, if you don't agree with CLAs, just don't contribute to Ubuntu, Qt, or GNU.

There's the QT agreement (doesn't say I would contribute to QT, but it is there) and GNU uses the CLA four court actions (so to protect your rights), not to relicense (so to steal your rights). Different stories.
But guess what will happen with Canonicals approach? Nobody will contribute. So in the end they will be forced to develop in-house.

[Bathroom Humor]

I didn't set out hating the newer Gnome 3 Nautilus. At first it was OK, but over time they just removed things that they had no business removing, and changed things that didn't really need to be changed (and nothing was improved by changing it). Simplicity is fine, but not everyone is THIS simple when it comes to technology. That's one of the biggest failure points in Gnome 3 so far. Aiming for the bottom isn't always a good idea.

It makes sense for them to use another File Manager, but it would be even better if they didn't make thier own from scratch. They do want to become profitable at some point, yes? Why invest in a new alternative when there are plenty of other worthy desktop file managers to borrow from. Nemo is actually really good in this regard. I realize it isn't QT, making it imperfect. But if they worked on making a QT version that closely mirrored it, I would be quite happy.
Another big worry for me is that in making a new file manager, they make many of the same mistakes that the Gnome folks did, with no remedy to fix it up for the majority of their existing userbase. The current mobile file manager mockups I saw looked OK for a phone, but not good at all for a desktop, so let's hope they tweak it around with (many) more options.