Filesystem - hiding system folders?

[Chanchao]

Wow, great replies, and I learned a lot, too. Thank you all. Some
comments:

Jeff wrote:
> Nautilus supports .hidden files already, so it would 
> just be a matter of finding the right place to put them, 
> and the right things to hide

When nautilus preferences are set to not show 'hidden files', it could
be set (as a preference) to also not show /dev /boot /bin etc, as the
only way people would go into those would be for administration tasks. 

Alternatively, in addition to the checkbox for hidden files, there could
be one where you can select if you want to see 'system files'. This
could be off by default for normal users, but on for nautilus running
with root privileges who would get to see all folders in / . 

> Making nice directory names for the other stuff is harder,
> and not quite so useful,

Yes, in that case I agree on the renaming.

John wrote:
> I recall that in the old days of 8.3 files, Norton 
> allowed you to attach comments to files.

Ah... so when using nautilus it could show for example "etc [system
configuration]"  (not changing the actual name of course, just nautilus'
presentation. 

> Simply adding friendly looking icons to the folders 
> that are actually useful might help. "If a folder looks
> boring, it probably is"

Hey, I like that too!!  Apple has done that from day one with its
standard folders I guess.  Come to think of it, it also had a nice
accessible folder to drop fonts in.. Ubuntu's 'fonts' preferences don't
actually allow you to view, manage or install fonts.

Josué wrote:
> It will not be too useful if .hidden is only used in
>  nautilus. .hidden files are not used by gtk-open-dialog
> for example. Also, customs icons are not used in gtk->
> dialogs.

So what you're really saying is that gtk-open-dialog would have to be
updated as well, or integrated with nautilus' preferences? :) I think
there's already some minor discrepancies between the two? 

Alan wrote:
...a good explanation for why things are the way they are.

Thanks!!!

Alan also wrote:

> The most compelling reason is the POV *nix developers have 
> of their users: Our user are intelligent people who 
> know what they are doing,  are not complete idiots and 
> don't need their hands held. We do not need to protect 
> our users from themselves. Windows OTOH has this 
> view: You are an idiot. 

I have to say the latter seems the safer assumption. :) And the people
who know what they're doing will still be able to do things, and because
they're perceived to go 'deeper under the hood', their pedestal will
seem higher and their kind will be even cliqueier (God I hope that's a
word). :)  So they might actually like it.  Power users probably don't
use nautilus for just about anything other than organizing pictures
anyway?

> There are other ways to accomplish what you want - like restricting 
> users to their home directories. Meanwhile, 10 minutes of user 
> education nicely solves the entire problem as to what all these 
> directories are for.

I seriously doubt you can GET 10 minutes of reading technical stuff from
most users. However a 10 minute cartoonish animated walk-through
presented by a cute animated mascotte figure named Ubunny: Maybe.
[ Initial toe-cramp now extended to well beyond the buttocks ]

Seriously though, something accessible and not boring looking might also
be the way to smoothen the initial steep learning curve when moving to
Ubuntu from other non-*nix operating systems. Even an erm, "less manly
looking" getting-started presentation that actually teaches some
concepts might still be preferable to things like Automatix or
Ubuntuguide that just do certain things without the user knowing what's
going on and what's being fixed (or broken).

Jan wrote:
> Why not simply hide the "Filesystem" link to '/' from Nautilus 
> for users that are not members of the 'admin' group?

I like that too, however there ARE certain places that some people need
to go. Like the place where (Windows) drives are mounted.  USB drives
and cameras and such show up as mounted icons on the desktop or in the
'Computer' window, but not other drives.  Then web pages would be
in /var/www that some people need access to, etc.  

Jason wrote:
> Why not indeed, if no sudo access, then no root access seems logical

Yes, though keep in mind that most users (using their own computer
mostly by themselves) DO have sudo access / administrative rights.

Tristan wrote:
> /usr/share/doc/
> /usr/share/
> /opt/somethirdpartyprogram/examples
> IMHO it's best not to second guess your users intentions

Of course.. though Jason was not suggesting to completely disable access
to those, merely not to showing them in a nautilus file browser run by
an ordinary user account.

Cheers,
Chanchao