[Thunar-dev] Classic UI

[Adam Scheinberg]

> As for the last comments about the difference between a manager 
> and a web browser, I'm not so sure if there is one (or a least a big one)

Since you brought it up, I'm positive that MANY people will disagree,
but not only do I agree, but I firmly believe that there should NOT be
a difference.  Microsoft has gone to great lengths to make Explorer
(the file manager) hand off URLs (both http(s?) and ftp) to IE
seamlessly.  KDE has made Konq a single entity, and it does
everything.  For a user, a single window that has the power to browse
directories as easily as the web is attractive and often cited as less
confusing, as they can predict the behavior, which is then consistent.
 I'll look for some sources on that.

However, that said,  I also see the need at some point (which I know,
according to the wiki, is definitely at least a 2.0 feature) for a VFS
for mounting remote file systems.  I think the ability to handle local
files, http traffic, ftp, ssh, nfs, smb, etc in one window is
awesomely powerful.  I'd love  a non-clogged, speedy interface that
can offer me that.  After all, why should I handle files and
directories differently from one location to another? Should it matter
whether the folder is local, on a local server, or on a remote server?

I don't know if I feel that burn://, start-here://, fonts;//, apps://,
etc make as much sense, but I certainly feel that browsing in general
is an activity for which a single application does make sense.

That's why, as attractive as path view is, I'd vote for a location bar. 

Adam


On Wed, 16 Mar 2005 12:28:26 -0600, Todd Schiller
<tschiller at llamabox.com> wrote:
> Hi, I'm new to the list and have a few comments about the current debate:
> 
> ARGUMENTS FOR PATHBAR:
> 
> (1) for novices, it looks a lot friendlier
> (2) it is easier to backtrack
> 
> ARGUMENTS FOR LOCATIONBAR:
> (1) for novices, it is easier to be able to take a directory, and then
> navigate quickly to that directory, say if they are reading a web howto
> and would like to navigate somewhere
> 
> (2) for others, it can be much faster to just type in the directory name
> especially if there is name completion
> 
> (3) when a directory is cluttered with other directories, name
> completion may be easier than finding another directory
> 
> Overall, I can think of situations in which I would like to use each
> interface. This may be out of the question, but would it be create a
> hotkey combo to switch between a location bar and the pathbar? That
> would allow advanced users to be able the gain the functionality they
> want when they want it and allow novice users to choose the design that
> fits them the best. Or, I think it would be nice to have the path bar on
> the bottom and the location bar on the top (I'm sure many will object
> saying it would be too cluttered). You could kind of make it so it is a
> seperate pane to the right of the short cuts pane and under the folder view.
> 
> As for the last comments about the difference between a manager and a
> web browser, I'm not so sure if there is one (or a least a big one). In
> both cases you are trying to navigate a structure that can often be very
> complex... we can imagine a cluttered website full of links just as we
> can a directory cluttered with folders and files.
> 
> I am very interested in helping with the development of thunar. Though I
> have little experience with interface design and programming, I believe
> I could help with the lower level things such as hashing, etc. I don't
> know quite who to contact with these aspirations, so I just figured I'd
> post them here.
> 
> Overall, I think its shaping up to be a great looking file manager.
> 
> Just my $.02
> 
> Todd Schiller
> _______________________________________________
> Thunar-dev mailing list
> Thunar-dev at xfce.org
> http://foo-projects.org/mailman/listinfo/thunar-dev
> 


-- 
Adam Scheinberg
ascheinberg at gmail.com