Re: [OT/Sometimes Windows is better] Horrible GNOME File Picker (Was: Open (helper application chooser) for iceweasel/icedove is too simple)
Wim De Smet said...
> On 1/11/07, marc <gmane@auxbuss.com> wrote:
> > But that's my point, really: why continue to clone TC, when there are so
> > many additional functions out there on other tools that leave TC in the
> > dust? If devs stick their heads in the sand and ignore developments then
> > things will atrophy. In fact, in the domain of file mangers, I think
> > they atrophied some time ago on Linux. And that's a shame.
>
> I know that in the case of nautilus at least the devs have chosen to
> drop a lot of options in the name of usability.
In the same way that Bush uses the word 'freedom' ;-) Reducing
functionality does not equate to improved usability. Chopping off my
legs certainly makes me a more compact human being. Gouging out my eyes
makes my brain less 'bloated'.
> And I personally don't
> think that's a bad thing. Your choice of words seems to indicate you
> do, but let's be clear that this is a personal preference. Personally
> I don't even _want_ my file manager to have all these fancy features.
> The devs of nautilus are not sticking their head in the sand, they've
> just got an entirely different philosophy of what a good file manager
> should do.
What I actually think is that Linux app devs are the most conservative
on the planet. I think that once an app is mainstream - gains some
recognition - that that conservatism is compounded and a fear of failure
takes over and the atrophy begins. Worse, sometimes the app regress - I
cite Gnome as the leading example.
> I think what you should really do right now is scratch that itch and
> build your own file manager.
LOL The cry of the true conservative. At least you didn't suggest I "go
back to Windows, which you clearly love" or some such nonsense.
There are some excellent areas of innovation in Linux - and there always
will be - but 'success' seems to taint apps with the kiss of death, or,
at least, turns them to stone.
--
Cheers,
Marc
Reply to: