Gnome Switches Nautilus Back To Browser Mode 311
An anonymous reader writes "In one of the do-the-developers-actually-use-their-own-software decisions in the Linux Desktop World, back in 2004 Gnome switched to the 'Spatial' view by default with their Nautilus file manager opening a new window with each new folder viewed. Many derided the decision as poor design or as being different for the sake of being different. Well, after five long years the Gnome powers that be have decided to switch back to browser mode."
Nautilus following KDE's Dolphin? (Score:5, Interesting)
It does appear that Nautilus' people are taking many many lessons from (let's not say ripping off) KDE's Dolphin. I mean, if you compare Nautilus' demo screenshot [gnome.org] and you use KDE's Dolphin [kde.org] (please ignore the command line at the bottom and info dock widget at the right) on a daily basis you will be hard pressed to find any differences.
Re:Nautilus following KDE's Dolphin? (Score:5, Funny)
(please ignore the command line at the bottom and info dock widget at the right)
you will be hard pressed to find any differences.
You're absolutely right! If you ignore the differences then you will be hard pressed to find any differences!
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
The only differences between that pair of screenshots consists on a couple of dock window widgets which are pretty much never used on KDE's Dolphin and are turned off by default. I use KDE exclusively on a daily basis and I had to look at the screenshot to learn that KDE's Dolphin had an Info dock window and if you happen to use Dolphin then the window config you will get will be exactly the same config as the one Nautilus is sporting on it's screenshot.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Slipping a more sensible default in by stealth after everybody had been accustomed to toggling the p
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Have not noticed this thing as Debian and Ubuntu sensibly switched it back to browser mode by default for its releases. That is part of the reason why distributions exist - provide sensible defaults for their users.
Re:Nautilus following KDE's Dolphin? (Score:5, Insightful)
Yes, they have copied the "split view" (one of the killer features of dolphin/konqueror).
Now Gnome needs to fix the file chooser dialog so that it can 1) have views other than "list view", 2) view generate thumbnails of all kind of files that nautilus can (PDFs, videos, etc) 3) a list view that can order the files by something that is not modification date or size (for example, the type of archive) 4) a list view with BIG icons, not miniatures that are so tiny that you can't tell what picture is in the thumbnail and need a ugly extra panel on the right side of the dialog to show the preview
The main reason why Gnome can't do all those things is why the file chooser dialog is not a "gnome file chooser dialog", but a "GTK file chooser dialog". The KDE guys don't use the QT file chooser dialog (which exists), they use a KDE file chooser dialog that can use any part of KDE (including parts of konqueror/dolphin) while the gtk dialog can't use nautilus or anything besides the basic GTK building blocks. They have been adding some hacks to avoid the need of writing a decent file chooser, but it still sucks and misses a lot of functionality.
Re:Nautilus following KDE's Dolphin? (Score:5, Interesting)
view generate thumbnails of all kind of files that nautilus can (PDFs, videos, etc)
With GIO, the file chooser can load any thumbnails that are available, but Gtk+ doesn't actually have the architectural pieces for doing thumbnailing itself (since it's quite a lot of specialized code that's not widely needed). But in most cases, Nautilus has already generated the thumbnails you require anyways.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
The Midnight Commander project was started in '94. Norton Commander was nearly a decade earlier.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Maybe because there are only so many ways to design a file manager? They've only been around for, what, 40 years?
Re: (Score:2)
Features such as implementing the separate directory levels in a path as buttons, splitting the directory view pane in the same window, implementing both a "places" and a directory tree view and adding a toolbar to let the user select how to display the files are features which are not around for 40 years. If that wasn't enough, implementing them in the exact same way to the point of even mimicking the layout which was premièred by Dolphin a hand full of years ago cannot be explained as a 40 year old t
Re: (Score:2)
They're all clones of Midnight Commander if you want to play that game.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
I think you don't get his point. He's not talking about the change from spatial to browser mode, he's talking about the overall new UI, which you have to admit looks like nearly a perfect copy of Dolphin.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
6 years ago, Nautilus didn't have the split view, the tabs, the bread crumb buttons or the Places panel. Windows Explorer still doesn't have some of those features to this day.
Re: (Score:2)
It seems very silly to play the who copied who game in the open source world though don't you think? Isn't that the point of the thing?
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
That's what the columns view does. Dolphin is the best file manager I've ever used, now that it's stable, used to crash frequently.
Re: (Score:2)
Features such as implementing the separate directory levels in a path as buttons, splitting the directory view pane in the same window, ...
NextSTEP [apfelwiki.de] had that kind of stuff ages ago.
Re:Nautilus following KDE's Dolphin? (Score:5, Informative)
Well, the rationale for changing from spatial to browser mode in Nautilus is because much of the functionality is now being implemented in Gnome-Shell.
From the following post [gnome.org] by Alexander Larsson:
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
You really couldn't bring yourself to simply toggle the terminal and info windows off with View --> Panels --> Terminal and View --> Panels --> Information or using the F11 and F4 hotkeys to make your point sans caveat?
Are you sure you are not a Gnome user? (sorry Linus; I couldn't resist, and lighten up mods. It's a playful / tongue in cheek chide, not a troll or flamebait)
Oh yeah. emacs sux and vi rulezz!!!
Thougt it was default (Score:2, Informative)
Is it really anything *new*? (Score:5, Informative)
I don't know any modern distribution that is using spatial mode for Nautilus windows. Ubuntu tried that and it was only 1 or 2 releases they kept this default setting. Can you help me out with listing distributions that this change will affect somehow?
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Is it really anything *new*? (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Does it matter? (Score:3, Interesting)
I only saw the weird "open a new window" mode once, I think it was on Solaris 10. Ubuntu, Opensolaris, etc all seam to have configured gnome to use the normal "browser" mode. If the distros set the gnome configuration, does it really matter what the default is?
Those who like the new-window-every-folder view... (Score:4, Funny)
Should be forced to use a browser that opens a new window every time a hyperlink is clicked
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Should be forced to use a browser that opens a new window every time a hyperlink is clicked
I'm pretty sure you misunderstand **spatial** mode. I don't want a spatial idea of all the pages on the internet, my head is not quite big enough for that, but I do like my spatial nautilus.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I use the middle button (wheel) for that, but it's no my default setting. Navigating through a site with that would be exasperating.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
They should use Amaya.
Re:Those who like the new-window-every-folder view (Score:3, Informative)
Not sure why this is moderated as interesting. The point of a spacial file browser is to use your spacial memory (which is big, and is the reason why you can find things all around the house or on a messy desk easily) to manage your files. Every time you open a folder, it opens in the same place on your screen. This lets you mentally associate screen locations with files.
The problem with spacial browsers is that they don't scale beyond a certain point. They were great on older machines where you'd only
Re: (Score:2)
Every time you open a folder, it opens in the same place on your screen.
The 1024x600px screen built into my laptop, or the 1360x768px screen I use when I take it home?
Re:Those who like the new-window-every-folder view (Score:4, Insightful)
> The point of a spacial file browser is to use your spacial memory
I thought spacial file browsers were for "spacial people" e.g. retards ;).
Seriously though, I agree. Lots of these "fancy UIs" that these jokers come up with only work fine for users who just need to manage a handful of objects (windows, tasks, files, folders) at a time.
I find this silly since there is evidence that people are already able to manage a handful of objects at a time ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Magical_Number_Seven,_Plus_or_Minus_Two [wikipedia.org] ), but can't manage far more.
We don't really need help when there are a few objects and need help when there are lots. But that's when all those stupid GUIs start getting in the way.
For example: thumbnailed windows don't really help when you have > 10 of them (especially if they are similar looking documents - using the same standardized template), same goes for those graphical selectors where they show the windows from a 3d or fancy perspective. Useless if you have 20+ windows, cool looking when you have three or four windows, but why'd you need them when you only have a few windows?
When you have a few objects to track you should be able to remember which ones are which. When you have way more, you need some help. That's where computers and software should help. But they don't!
The exceptions are some game UIs. Some of which are proof that you can build UIs that work for "noobs" and still help skilled users.
Games are also proof that people, when sufficiently motivated to, can actually do far more than what these Desktop GUI makers assume. Very many actions per second. Keeping track of stuff. Learning of difficult combos. So where's the Desktop GUI that actually helps you to sustain a high "actions per second" average?
I've personally suggested this:
http://live.gnome.org/GnomeShell/DesignersPlayground/KeyboardShortcuts [gnome.org]
And something like it in 2006:
http://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=121349 [kde.org]
I think this sort of thing will help skilled users more, while not getting in the way of "naive" users (you can still leave the flashy stuff for them).
Car analogy: current OS GUI designers seem to be making cars that look really cool (and are theme-able) but have top speed of 30kph (play a beautiful animation while doing so), have a range of 3km, and have only space for one person at a time.
Not really helpful when we need to do some serious traveling.
Re: (Score:2)
Do people drag things between browser windows? Yes, that is targeted at all the morons who have no idea what drag and drop is...granted nautilus's spacial implementation never impressed me. It would be lovely if the people who hate spacial could learn how to use more than one hand at a time and learn to use metaphor to their advantage. There is so much more you can when using two hands that it is ridiculous.
Now for List Mode... (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Nautilus and most other file browsers also default to Icon view, which is fine if you have only about 5 files on your computer, which was probably true for Windows for Workgroups 3.1, but these days List view should be the default.
Unless you prefer to keep a proper and useful layout of your data in which case icon view is a lot better.
And as soon as there are more than 20 files/directories in a directory, I am on the shell, anyway.
I.e.: It all depends on the particular use case.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
That's more an indication of how crap the Desktop GUI or file manager is. Seriously.
Using a CLI may be better over high latency low bandwidth links, or when you are scripting stuff.
But it is a really terrible GUI if it's better to use the shell just because you need to deal with more than 20 files.
I bet gamers will still find it easier to manage hundreds of "RTS game" units with a GUI than a CLI.
Perhaps ga
Re: (Score:2)
I am not sure where you learned what the majority of people prefer. _I_ certainly don't presume to know that.
But yes, being able to change stuff is good in any case.
Re: (Score:2)
Nautilus and most other file browsers also default to Icon view, which is fine if you have only about 5 files on your computer, which was probably true for Windows for Workgroups 3.1, but these days List view should be the default.
If you have so many nits to pick, why don't you just pay someone to do it right for you? OSS projects aren't in a position to give you a usable system, they can only provide you with raw code. Someone has to take this code and turn it into something useful and usable. This can be you or somebody working for you.
Re: (Score:2)
Learn to organize your files better. I use list view on long folders, but you do realize that most filesystems are hierarchical, yes? You shouldn't be poking around in system directories with the GUI as a rule, anyway. The GUI is for managing data files, not the whole system. Of course, you won't manipulate many files (save config files) when you administer a modern system; that is done through APIs, e.g. dpkg.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
That's pretty much how I've gotten to be. Semi-organized for things and let the damn search index keep track of the specifics. The only real organization I do now is website centric as I have several that I visit frequently that are structured around the creator/author/artist, which is how I've setup their folders. Much easier for me but for all the general downloading that I do, it simply goes into the damn Downloads folder by default and I sort later based on what it is.
Re: (Score:2)
Nautilus and most other file browsers also default to Icon view, which is fine if you have only about 5 files on your computer, which was probably true for Windows for Workgroups 3.1, but these days List view should be the default.
That's fine for generic fine but not for media files. If you dabble a bit in photography, you absolutely want preview view, not a list. 300 files named _IGP* aren't very helpful when you're quickly looking for something and you don't want to be bothered with a dedicated app.
Re:Now for List Mode... (Score:5, Informative)
Hmm... Maybe you are too young to know, but the list view was the default since forever, in all software. It’s why “ls“ is named “ls”.
Microsoft also had the list view in its file manager of Windows 3.1 and before.
Only with Windows 95 did the resolution even become high enough to allow it for file management. And only then did they merge the program groups (windows with icons inside) with the file manager (a tree of folders and a list of files) to create the Explorer (then they naturally added the web browser in there, as it’s just another space to browse).
It was hated by virtually everybody back then. As was the “new window for every folder‘ mode that became default.
I still have a script that fixes up all windows failures after installation. It’s called AntiDAU (DAU = dümmster anzunehmender user = dumbest assumable user), similar to (XP)AntiSpy nowadays.
I fear that I have to port that script to Gnome and KDE too. Which should tell you a lot about the sad state that they both are headed for (or actually, always were in a bit).
Re: (Score:2)
Part of the reason might be they don't know any better.
Just as that I'm pissed off the MS explorer doesn t have a hotkey to enable folderview, in complex file systems I prefer to see the full path.
Spatial has never been for me.
Corporates in the Gnome Foundation (Score:5, Insightful)
Look 5 years ago indeed , in a gnome devel mailing list , we were a bunch to comment on that .. like the dual mode in other file browsers at the time where we have two panes to .. lo and behold . a devel asked me why one would use a dual pane file manager. .. if it takes 5 years to change a bad default .. by 2020 we should perhaps have :) Im cynical yes. But i loved gnome till 1.4 at 2.0 they hosed everything
and a few others
work with. Well
I gave up on it at that point. I suspect the corporates running the Gnome Foundation have a lot to do
with most the bad design decisions and the stubbornness at making Gnome bad in general.
As far as im concerned
a delete command by default too
that was truly good about it and made it into the lesser desktop. A shame.
Richard
Re:Corporates in the Gnome Foundation (Score:5, Insightful)
IMHO it's not 'corporates', it's developer group-think coupled with wilfully ignoring what damn near *everybody* is telling them.
When this was rolled out, the forums were *filled* with people complaining, people explaining exactly why it was a poor design choice, etc. But this was simply ignored because someone had a nice academic theory about why "spacial was more intuitive". Never mind that it wasn't, and that everyone hated it, and that it wasn't how people were used to computers working. They had a theory! All the users must be wrong!
Re: (Score:2)
I'm not defending Gnome in any way. Personally I've always found their defaults and UI design non-intuitive. However, one of the things I've always believed is that "ease of use" is more subjective than we imagine. People new to the Linux desktop may find it counter-intuitive compared to the Windows desktop they've used for years.
But imagine if we were blank slates with no pre-conceived notions of how a desktop should behave?
For example, when I sort things in a desk drawer, I don't put my pens near my print
Still waiting for a Total Commander equivalent (Score:4, Interesting)
I switched to Linux 4 months ago, and what I still miss is a file manager as good as Total Commander. Krusader seems to be the closest and most feature rich, but it just isn't as complete and as polished as Total Commander. And it crashes about once every few days. So sometimes, I have to start a WinXP VM, just to have the power and reliability of Total Commander.
In other words, I don't care so much for little details in Nautilus. It doesn't seem any worse than Windows Explorer, and seems better than the Mac Finder (which is the file manager that Nautilus resembles most). I just wish there would be more resources to improve Krusader.
(Midnight Commander is excellent in a console, and should be part of the base install of every distro)
Re:Still waiting for a Total Commander equivalent (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
No need to switch to Windows VM. Total Commander works nicely under Wine (www.winehq.org)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Krusader is indeed the best candidate to try and get something to the level of TC, but it really needs a lot of work. I really wish I had the time to grab the codebase and start hammering on those rough edges ...
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Actually I personally in my long kde time always found Konqueror superior to total commander in everything except that much of the goodyness was hidden behind kio::slaves (sftp://blabla for instance)
and in shortcuts, you could reach various notworked filesystem you could split and tab as youd like and etc... but it took time to learn it, most of the functionality was not obvious.
I never missed total commander in Linux, on OSX however... sure there is pathfinder, but it is not the same!
NEWSFLASH (Score:5, Insightful)
Please see http://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=47948 [gnome.org] for this age old 'unimportant' bug.
Even the basics take ages for them.
Re: (Score:2)
P.S. André Klapper, is that you?
coreutils (Score:2)
kids these days (Score:2)
I'm still hoping for a GUI version of FList from my VM/CMS days. *sigh*
Oh good. Maybe this question isn't off-topic then (Score:2)
How the hell do I change the default window size?! As it is, unless I provide a "--geometry" command line option, any time I open up a nautilus window, it is too small to view whatever I am looking at and needs to be expanded. Does anyone know how to change the default window size or how to tell it to remember the size or something?
Re: (Score:2)
Spatial made sense (Score:2)
I didn't like the switch to spatial at first, but after using it it became clear that the reasoning for it was sound - it's much better to use than browser mode. Annoyed it's going away, hope they retain the option to have nautilus use spatial mode.
The futility of HIGs is what it shows (Score:5, Insightful)
Back in the 80s there was some point in HIGs, and Apple back then was generally felt to lead the way. The reason was that there were, among your users, a very high proportion of new users. So we conflated ease of use with ease of learning, and it was not completely stupid, for much of the market using and learning were the same thing.
Now however HIGs have become part of the problem rather than part of the solution, because they make the implicit assumption that everyone works in the same way, and has the same basic skills. We just do not. And anyone who experiments a bit with end users will find this out in a flash. I have had people who loved spatial browsing because it might be cluttered, but they always knew where they were. Then there are people who love Gnome and the desktop and love to put all their files all over it where they can see them. And then you have the odd case of some totally non-technical person, who you try out with Fluxbox, and you get the reaction that this is great, this is how I always thought Linux was supposed to be, no clutter and very minimalist and above all fast. It turns out that hand edited menus and the explicit startup of the file manager are actually something some non-technical people welcome and find refreshing. Others of course will run a mile. One size does not fit all.
The Gnome ideal, that there is such a thing as the right way to set up a desktop, an application, is the problem. There simply is not, and when you take that approach, the penalty is that you inconvenience and impair working for at least one third of the people using it. Far beter to have a few broad choices, and then let people refine within it, and offer some guidelines. If you are not very computer familiar, start out with this, then see if, a while later, you want to move to this, and here is a very minimalist alternative.
HIGs are a snare and a delusion, very apt that they are sometimes rudely referred to as 'interface fascism'.
Familiarity for guest users (Score:2)
The Gnome ideal, that there is such a thing as the right way to set up a desktop, an application, is the problem.
If you ever want to let guests use your machine without the UI utterly confusing them, or if you yourself are a guest (e.g. on a computer at a public library), there has to be a "right way" so that the guests have a frame of reference.
Re: (Score:2)
Ubuntu Gets Defaults Right (Score:2)
I've been using Linux at home for 10 years. Ubuntu is the first distro to get the choice of defaults right, something close to what is useful and what end users actually want.
Re: (Score:2)
Ubuntu is the first distro to get the choice of defaults right, something close to what is useful and what end users actually want.
You mean the update notifier popping over what you're doing rather with an icon notification? Or with (as of Karmic) IPV6 settings that break a lot of commonly used routers? Or (starting with 10.04) using a program that destroys image exif data as their default image-viewer? Ubuntu has done a lot for Linux and lately seems to be doing a lot against it too :-(
Catastrophical ... this could mean the end ... (Score:2)
The plot thickens ... it always starts like that.
I've always knew these little Gnomes were going to take over the world. First they'll start 20,000 miles under the sea by putting the Nautilus back to browser mode.
bottom line: Don't trust Gnomes ... Don't trust Dwarves either, since Santa isn't a real Elf anyways!
A File Chooser Addon that takes pasted path? (Score:2)
Well for web browsers, when I click Browse, you have to click all the way to the file you want. Has
there been an add-on for FF that lets you paste/click-paste the path to a file directly? Otherwise it's
like dig, dig, dig towards the destination folder, or do you guys use these file managers (Nautilus.
Dolphin et al) to surf the web as well because of this feature?
WTF? (Score:2)
Well, of course they did. (Score:4, Interesting)
back in 2004 Gnome switched to the 'Spatial' view by default
Of course. They always copy the worst of all ideas Microsoft, and on top of it, do it way too late too. To make sure that really everybody already knows and hates that from MS, and disables it as the first action of installing a Gnome... uuum I mean Windows desktop. ;)
Don’t mod me troll here, as I am a big friend of Linux. I’ve just got a huge problem with the fact, that pretty much all “mainstream“ Linux desktop environments are always imitating, and never innovating. Always with the (invalid) excuse of wanting to make it easier to switch.
Exceptions prove the rule: The only glimpse of innovation came from KDE with their “semantic desktop” idea. But it came in one atomic package with a huge load of other “improvements” for the worse.
The thing is, that that point of view is not ever going to get them anywhere. They are their own worst enemies. It’s simple psychology: If you wanna lead, you gotta lead. Simple as that.
Only when both Gnome and KDE teams (and even the XFCE team) stop reacting... to the stupid part of their users, and especially to Microsoft or even Apple... only then will it ever become the year of Linux on the desktop.
I’ll explain: If you got something, that perfectly imitates something else... then what’s the point of switching in the first place? See... it’s not getting you anywhere, to imitate.
If you, on the other hand, got features, that nobody else has, or has even thought about...
I mean, from what I see, the Linux community got an insane amount of genius that is simply thrown away for the fear of not being loved by Windows users.
It’s like with women: If you want a girl, you don’t come to her all needy, trying everything just to be loved. That’s just gonna drive her away. You make yourself stand out. You draw her in, by being something special that she wants to be a part of. I mean, who wants someone who tries to suck up to himself? Nobody.
Guys, let’s make the best fuckin’ desktop environment on the planet!!
Of course we listen to the actual needs of the users. But not from that needy standpoint. Not to show them. We don’t need anyone’s approval.
Allow yourselves to revolutionize the way people think about desktop environments! If you got something that you think is really great, draw us in! Be the leading figure. Whoever told you that you can’t be the one that Steve Jobs and Bill Gates look up to for inspiration: Tell them to go fuck themselves for limiting you! It’s bullshit! You decide what you can do.
And then you just do.
Because in the end, that’s what really will make users love you!
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
I have to agree with your assessment to a large degree. The "make it like Windows" argument really needs to have its ass kicked definitively. Are we supposed to introduce a C: drive? ("Where is my C: drive?" was my first puzzlement, way back when).
Gnome has done some good things.
I remember when Gnome and KDE were first around and they pretty much looked alike: double wide panel at the bottom of the screen. The first time I saw the Gnome dual panel set up, it was actually from a screenshot of someone doi
What about a single task bar? (Score:3, Insightful)
I prefer spatial view (Score:3, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
But that would involve working with those crazy KDE devs and stuff!?! ;)
Plus it'd only end up like html where each DE handles a setting differently anyway, even if they agree to handle them the same.
Nice idea, but I found once I got used to gnome I've just stuck with it (I tried kde awhile ago and had lots of trouble and never really bothered changing again) - Plus I haven't yet had gnome drop all my settings upgrading from one version to another, so its not really something I care about...
Re: (Score:2)
There have been some efforts towards moving to a unified settings system (see DConf/GSettings), but even then, each application is responsible for its own settings.
Not a bad idea... (Score:2)
That is something FreeDesktop could fix. Though please please please use a path like
~/.etc/desktop/preferences
I suggest you write to their mailing list about it and see what you get. If you don't, please reply to this post and I will.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
The dot-files don't show up in Finder, but I don't expect them to, nor do I even want them to. If I'm poking around in Finder, then
Re: (Score:2)
perhaps there should be some "universal" preference file format...
A "registry" of preferences and settings, as it were!
Re: (Score:2)
Spatial will still be there. You can even change that behaviour from the configuration dialogue (how about that?). I assume that the split mode can be turned of by gconf or a configuration dialogue. If not, I won't be very happy.
Re: (Score:2)
As long as you can configure around it we can both be happy. Seriously, this is an article about the default (out of the box) state of a check box.
Re: (Score:2)
Because after having to close 20 unused windows while navigating, you are filled with murderous rage.
I don't mean it can't be useful ever, but as a default? Hell no.
Re: (Score:2)
Control-Shift-W
Doesn't seem to enrage me.
Mart
Re: (Score:2)
Do you really think grandma is going to be able to debug source code and figure out why some crazy driver doesnt install
No, she's going to pay someone else to do it for her. The freedom in free software is the freedom to pay any competent developer, not just the original publisher who may have a business reason to end-of-life a peripheral's driver to get people to re-buy.
when on Windows you just put in the disk, click install and it works?
On Windows, one is more likely to misplace the disc by the time he needs to reinstall, and driver discs for Windows 5.x (Windows 2000, Windows XP, Windows Server 2003) don't work on Windows 6.x (Windows Vista, Windows Server 2008, Windows 7).
Often important features that allow people to customise it are removed or don't exist because some developer decided they didn't use the feature and just didn't care that there might be someone else who used it.
Or the people wh
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
The idea that all manufacturers will release code or specs is sheer fantasy. There is little or no business motivation and Linux is really a small group of users, 95% using Windows, there really is no point and no monetary reason for them to support such a small minority. In thinking that they can get hardware makers to release source the kernel developers think they are more important than they really are. All their actions do is keep Linux an OS that no one really cares about on the desktop. If thier ideo
Re: (Score:2)
But it do to the ideologies that made GCC so monolithic and difficult to extend, of RMSs that is the reason behind this. It is a similar failed ideology behind Linus et al and their refusal to support a stable Kernel ABI, either Linux developers change their thinking or linux will stay a niche OS forever. Again, in both cases, the software is being LIMITED in functionality and design decisions are being influenced by politics. Linux remains the difficult to use and pretty much useless on the desktop toy whi
Re: (Score:2)
Too bad you chose to dilute the 1 or 2 possibly relevant and/or useful points you might otherwise made with a bunch of stuff that is utterly beside the point (and mostly out of date besides).
Re: (Score:2)
windows just works while Linux is usually a pain in the ass to configure
Bullshit. You've obviously never had to do anything serious on either platform. If you had, you'd realize that Linux is much easier to customize and configure to the desired needs. Much easier to lock-down. Much easier to prevent virus infectiions. Much easier to install software reliably. This is all bunk spread by idiots who barely know how to wipe their own asses.
Re: (Score:2)
Actually I have used both Linux and Windows. On Windows, all of my hardware works, there is a driver for everything. I have stuff that won't work on Linux at all or very poorly.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:why anyone would use gnome is another question (Score:4, Insightful)
If Windows is so easy to use, why am I constantly asked "How do I do this?", "Why won't this work?" and "How do I make this work?" by Windows users?
The Windows UI is dog shit.
Re: (Score:2)
Well, if they don't know how something works they should just go read the man page.
Re:why anyone would use gnome is another question (Score:4, Interesting)
Which reminds me of the Windows help system. Do any normal end users use it? I don't use Word at all but I am, for some reason, the guy everyone asks how to do something in Word. I just use the help system. This is considered deep, powerful black magic by most people.
Re:why anyone would use gnome is another question (Score:4, Informative)
The UI developers have somehow created a UI system that somehow blows dozens of MB but actually provides less customisability and ease of use than Windows.
You were doing OK until you hit this. There are few standards on the Windows platform for GUI that matter. Look at Windows Media Player, MS Word and, just for the hell of it, Internet Explorer 8. Toss in Lotus Notes, Quickbooks, iTunes and you have a full swing helpdesk nightmare. KDE and Gnome applications are remarkably consistent in their respective UIs. On top of that, I can run KDE apps on Gnome and Gnome apps on KDE. It just works.
I'll take Linux over Windows every day because the business model is not selling defective by design software and then extorting money from the user to fix known defects. Your hardware, driver, and developer rant? I've never experienced the same issue - save hardware documentation. I've had many hardware manufacturers who have withheld documentation, but nary an open source project that did or failed to have workable documentation after the first version or two (about par for the course for proprietary software, anyway..
How? Why? (was Re:yay!) (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
But if you were 50 or not a grandmother or not a feminist, you wouldn't care?