Originally posted by dee.
View Post
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
Ubuntu Planning To Develop Its Own File Manager
Collapse
X
-
Great news. I dislike nautilus which is big and slow,full of lots of unsolved bugs(e.g, Bug 356836).
Comment
-
Originally posted by Akka View PostSo what do you use a file manager for?
I thought people still used the terminal for the "real" work.
Nautilus recursive search is perfect for movies, pdf doc, and ebooks. Everything else use the terminal.
Comment
-
Originally posted by hajj_3 View PostI'd like to see a clone of Windows 8's 'file manager' but with tabbed windows support, it would perfect! I'd also like a linux equivalent of windows 8's 'task manager' but with a tab for gpu too which windows doesn't have. These 2 things would make linux not only more usable but more familiar to windows users switching to linux.
Originally posted by newwen View PostI like how Gnome looks (it's much prettier that that pile of flame that kde is)
Originally posted by dee. View PostUbuntu Planning To Develop Its Own _______________
What else is new...
Originally posted by mrugiero View PostIt's funny to read this from a self-named X.org fanboy.
Comment
-
Originally posted by dee. View PostUbuntu Planning To Develop Its Own _______________
What else is new...
Although I don't like their idea of Mir, I support their decision to work on a new file manager. I don't like the direction new Nautilus is heading to. Let's see how it progresses.
Comment
-
You know, people plainly complain about GNOME 3 just like Mac users complained about Mac OS X when it was released. They don't complain about new vs. old, they complain about one product being replaced by another one. Well I think they may be right (johnc doesn't get everything wrong) but there is one big difference here, which is free software.
Indeed GNOME 2 was forkable and was forked. Also some traditionnal U/X desktops like XFCE were filling that gap. There is nothing filling OS 9's gap. So what is seen as uterly non-professionnal is nothing compared to the transition to OS X. Yet no one's calling Apple non-professionnal... from the time the uterly broken Mac OS 10.0 (which I can openly state was MORE broken than GNOME 3.0 in many ways, not even able to burn a CD out of the box) Mac OS 9 was not maintained any longer, only to be updated to 9.2 some time after, which only improved the Classic compatibility layer and made it instable when used alone. We had to wait until Mac OS 10.3 to reach feature parity with OS 9.1. So if professionnal developpers maintain older products until new versions are ready, what was Apple doing at the time ?
Also see Windows XP vs Windows Vista, or Seven vs Windows 8, or Windows Millenium vs 98...
Comment
-
Dolphin should have been an obvious choice here. Though it might depend on other KDE technologies which Canonical might not like to include just to be able to load Dolphin. And more importantly Canonical wouldn't own the copyright, which seems to be their most important goal atm. It really gets me thinking that they might want to market a version of Ubuntu that includes proprietary add-ons, similar to what Google is doing with Android recently.
Comment
Comment