Feature request: browsing filesystem in gnome "computer" menu

[Diego Andrés Asenjo González]

Hi to all!
I have been ignored in the last messages. I hope it is going to be the
exception.
> On Thu, 18 Nov 2004 14:32:05 +0000, poptones <dlist at ubuntuforums.org> wrote:
> >
> > "Shift-double-click... alt-click... apple-click.. windows-click"
I dont want to make a flame, but obviously there are a lot of "geek
ways" to use nautilus, but I think "we" hope Ubuntu is going to be
used by a normal user.
> >
> > If it takes two hands just to open a silly folder, someone needs to
> > rethink the term "usability."
I agree.
> 
> Use double-middle-click, then ;)
> 
> Seriously, changing which button you use cannot be *that* difficult.
Of course, for a geek or a developer is so easy .. but the left-click
is like a defacto standard.
> 
> > Software that "forces" the user is not user-friendly - it's the
> > opposite. It's coercion, and not the compiler kind; It's
> > anti-libertarian. It might be simple, but so is a cardboard box.
> 
> Ok, I'll leave the cardboard metaphor alone... Come on. Software
> always forces some choices on users. Unless it's a incredible mess
> with 3.14 billions of configurable buttons, which is not what I'd call
> "usable". MS Windows 95 forced me to use their silly navigation
> metaphor, whereas I was used to GEM's spatial navigation on my Atari
> ST. These are all choices. The point is, are those choices relevant ?
> In this case, you seem to think they aren't, and some think they are.
> So what ?
Sadly, Windows and the file explorer in "browse mode" are another
defacto standard. Im not a Windows user, I dont like Windows. I just
want to have a "usable"  Linux desktop. Just make it deafult browser,
and leave the spatial configuration at four clicks of distance.
> 
> Should we make it configurable, like you suggest ? I don't think so.
> Configuration is tricky, it's something for the technically minded. A
> few years ago, when I tried to make people switch from IE to mozilla
> 1.0, they would just yield because it was "too complicated". Of
> course, everything was secure and powerful and configurable. But Joe
> User does not want a 1.200 items, tree-like configuration menu. So
> they would just go back to the big blue "e" on the desktop.
The 95% of the people are used to the browser mode. If the 5% like the
spatial mode .. make it easy configurable for them.
> 
> >From a non-technical user's point of view, navigation buttons are also
> difficult to grasp. Why is it that "up" and "back" almost always give
> the same result, but not always ?
> 
> Should we keep the address bar ? I don't think so, neither. Most
> people don't ever look at it, and I don't speak about writing anything
> inside it. And most of those that would are technically savvy enough
> to put nautilus into whichever mode they prefer. Actually, if you
> *need* an address bar that bad, hit ctrl+L, here it is, where do you
> want to go today, sir ?
> 
> A possibility would be to have a "first time wizard", like Mandrake's
> "drakfirsttime", which would allow a new user to fix those kinds of
> preferences, like browser or spatial, pop or imap, vi or emacs and
> whatnot. But leave the configuration menus alone.
It could be.
I just dont want that good programmers like you spend time discusing
about a little feature of Nautilus for a week.
> 
> Remainder: the Gconf tool is easily accessible from Ubuntu's menu.
> >From here, search nautilus, choose preferences, select
> always_use_brower (the effect of the key is documented in your choosen
> language). You'll only need to do this once.
Remainder: the Gconf tool is easily accessible from Ubuntu's menu.
>From here, search nautilus, choose preferences,  disable
always_use_brower (the effect of the key is documented in your choosen
language). You'll only need to do this once to have spatial mode.

I insist, I dont want to flame.

Sorry for my poor English.

Congratulations to all the developers.

> --
> Arnold Maestre