Do we really need nautilus? Will the dash/file lens convert it into a legacy app?

Note: read before replying. As many dont read, just the title (and not completely either).. Many will not even read this warning..

----Post: Is the dash becoming ubuntu's new _central hub_?

I see nautilus converting into a legacy app after maybe 1 or 2 years..

File lens is getting good: http://www.omgubuntu.co.uk/2011/10/new-movie-scope-brings-rich-meta-data-filters-to-movie-files-in-ubuntu

-Many dont really like or use this new nautilus that much anymore thanks to the dash/file lens.

-Many are disappointed at gnome for taking features away and not wanting to bring them back.

-The file lens still needs a few features (tooltips, show file properties, select/cut/paste and breadcrumbs; yea thats basically all file-lens needs to be a full blown file-manager-lens and i see the gap closing in). So it could well substitute for basic home folder stuff.

-We dont even need it for mounting drives, as the unity launcher does this already.

-Also looks out of place with the dash. The less interfaces new user need to learn the better.

-Would become the best looking file manager out there.

-A trash can lens can even substitute the trashcan.

-Even a system settings lens can substitute the control panel

It will still be included, but probably as back-end and legacy to handle more advance operations ("the advance file manager"), old users who prefer it or browsing the root filesystem. But for basic stuff it will be used less and less. Oh and this is just to complete the unity/dash vision. All other *ubuntu derivatives will stay the same.

Dash may become the killer app in itself (the central hub).

some examples of evolution would be:

• File-lens to File-manager-lens
• Music-lens to **Music-player**-lens

But depending on your usage, you could install or remove either one, making ubuntu more customizable.

The dash search needs some work as it only looks at recently opened files.

If you type in search it finds the gnome search tool though.

nautilus is useful for far more than launching apps , it would be a major screwup to deprecate it .

ronacc said: nautilus is useful for far more than launching apps , it would be a major screwup to deprecate it .

if file-lens gets a few more features and the file-manager-lens becomes a reality then they would basically be the same thing: file managers. Might or might not happen right away, but the gap is closing in.

But nautilus will still be available as legacy for those who need it. Is not going away.

and this is what could happen to the music lens: http://lh3.googleusercontent.com/-rktxlGPG6IU/TpwcnTvZFWI/AAAAAAAAGUE/lZsxF1L44HU/sound.jpg

seems just like natural evolution (at least for the basics; the simple mode; no need to fully substitute).

LOL

I often wonder if I shouldn't just ditch the whole desktop and replace it with Worker. You know, Worker? It can do anything, too. The problem with doing that is that so many other applications actually expect you to have a desktop. Sheesh.

madjr said: Note: read before replying. As many dont read, just the title (and not completely either).. Many will not even read this warning..

----Post:

I see nautilus converting into a legacy app after maybe 1 or 2 years..

File lens is getting good: http://www.omgubuntu.co.uk/2011/10/new-movie-scope-brings-rich-meta-data-filters-to-movie-files-in-ubuntu

-Many dont really like or use this new nautilus that much anymore thanks to the dash/file lens.

-The file lens still needs a few features (tooltips, show file properties, select/cut/paste and breadcrumbs; yea thats basically all file-lens needs to be a full blown file-manager-lens and i see the gap closing in). So it could well substitute for basic home folder stuff.

-We dont even need it for mounting drives, as the unity launcher does this already.

-Also looks out of place with the dash. The less interfaces new user need to learn the better.

-Would become the best looking file manager out there.

-A trash can lens can even substitute the trashcan.

-Even a system settings lens can substitute the control panel

It will still be included, but probably as back-end and legacy to handle more advance operations ("the advance file manager"), old users who prefer it or browsing the root filesystem. But for basic stuff it will be used less and less. Oh and this is just to complete the unity/dash vision. All other *ubuntu derivatives will stay the same.

Dash may become the killer app in itself.

some examples of evolution would be:

• File-lens to File-manager-lens
• Music-lens to **Music-player**-lens

But depending on your usage, you could install or remove either one, making ubuntu more customizable.

Yes... You're spot on.

When we look at how modern devices interfaces is evolving, it makes sense that the desktop will also absorb this trend of simplification / unification of activities under one easy / known interface. While I initially hated this "let's make computers desktops look like a freaking iPod" trend, I can now understand the benefits for most standard users. It actually allow more people to use a PC.

A user can type a search for "Settings", "Mouse", "My3DGame", MyWorkStuff.doc", "MyFavoriteSong", "ChildrenPictures", etc all in the same place. No one will get lost trying to remember where a doc was saved or how to adjust accessibility settings. There's nothing else to learn. It's good for the standard users.

And people like us will most likely continue using Nautilus and other of the "complex" stuff. No one will develop a gdb lens :) I need to have my stuff into a rigid file structure. I need to open two or more file navigators side by side and compare / move / copy stuff. But most users need to perform one simple activity. IMHO Nautilus will be legacy (or maybe just an alternative download) soon.

[B]EDIT [/B]One of the challenges for the Linux desktop is (and has always been) the office suite. It's a vital part of the desktop. We know Libreoffice is considered to be complex by the standard user, with menus, submenus, many dialogs with lots of tabs, hard to find settings, not clear enough checkboxes, etc. It will (has to) change to keep up with the future. How can it change to adsorb these modernization trends? I have no idea.

I will watch with interest as this develops but until I see very positive results in terms of functionality and clear logical organization I will stand by my statement that reducing nautilus to legacy status is not a good thing . In reference to libreoffice if they want simpler there is abiword which is more than enough word processor for anything but the most sophisticated office tasks , A truly "full featured" office suite is by its nature complex and not really aimed at casual users , to fire up libreoffice to write a note to grandma is a misuse of the tool. MS office is not simple by any means , there are college courses just to teach its use .

ronacc said: I will watch with interest as this develops but until I see very positive results in terms of functionality and clear logical organization I will stand by my statement that reducing nautilus to legacy status is not a good thing .

In reference to libreoffice if they want simpler there is abiword which is more than enough word processor for anything but the most sophisticated office tasks , A truly "full featured" office suite is by its nature complex and not really aimed at casual users , to fire up libreoffice to write a note to grandma is a misuse of the tool. MS office is not simple by any means , there are college courses just to teach its use .

Not sure about it, because I can't remember the last time I installed Windows. If I'm not mistaken, at one point it used to come with some version of Microsoft Works. It was either XP, or Vista, can't remember for sure... It had a kind of "pre-ribbon" large top-menu with large icons like "Write a letter", "Create a shop list", etc that were labeled "Templates". I wonder if, at some point, one would write "Create a Shop List" in the dash and that will popup a word-like app (say abiword) already at a template with pre-added bullets, etc. I think that's the future.

While there is a pretty clear move in UI design to mask the file system, there is still a need to manage files at some level. While I think you are right that Unity and the raft of new lens planned will move the functionality for many users, some form or Nautilus will be with us for a long time. That said, I'm quite happy to do a lot of my basic, daily stuff via Unity or Terminal so it's not as big a part of my workflow as it used to be.

Nautilus has been dumbed down enough so I wouldn't miss it at all.

MacUntu said: Nautilus has been dumbed down enough so I wouldn't miss it at all.

#1. A big feature of Nautilus for us is "Network". Is there anything in the BFB that allows me to scan, preview, and download documents and jpg's on my other linux pc's and my wife's XP's?

#2. The BFB as I've been using it just gets a few "hieroglyphics" and readable titles per screenful. Nothing about size, date, permissions, etc so I have to resort to terminal ls -l. BFB very wasteful of screen space with lots of glyphs and little readable content. The Phoenicians made a huge stride forward compared to the Egyptian hieroglyphics.

#3. In installs and whatever I resort to gparted. Nothing in BFB anywhere close that I've seen.

I'm skeptic, Ubuntu is headed pell mell toward dumbing down. Now I use GUI's like synaptic for removing clutter that apt-get leaves around.

Dumbing down is just great for Apple users. If you are O.K. with Steve Job's idea of a user, fine. Want anything different, good luck.

Jerry

Dash, whats that ? how long it will survive ?

There are people hooking MS Kinectic to Linux PCs, and it already works officially with Windows. Stores have 3D LED PC monitors on sale. Even 3D laptops exist. People buy macs nowadays not because they enjoy risc more than cisc or they do specific gpu crunching stuff (like it was in the near past). They do so because, among other viral aspects, they like the "bling" of the desktop. These trends are is irreversible. The beauty of having this in an Open Source OS is that the non-standard user will be able to customize it its needs to absurd extents with fairly simple commands and small effort. That won't happen in future proprietary OSs (it already does not - to some degree).

The first Icon in my Launcher Bar is Nautilus, it's the default. However, when I right click it I have two versions an old friend in the quicklist. tux commander and gnome-commander. I have tux commander even set to a keyboard shortcut in my desktop. I do exactly what I would in Nautilus (and more!) in a midnight-commander way :) I don't care if its not visually adequate to the new appearance of the desktop, it works wonders.

[B]tux-commander [/B][ATTACH]205598[/ATTACH] [B]

gnome-commander[/B] [ATTACH]205599[/ATTACH]

So Nautilus was very good, we had a blast, etc. But for all I care, they can turn it into iNautilusPod and make it easier and more accessible for more people, as long as we have the freedom to install good software like these two commanders I mentioned.

people buy macs not just for the bling of the desktop , they buy macs because they just plain work , no muss no fuss .I built a dedicated multimedia box to hook up to my 42" lcd tv , and spent the next 2 years raising my blood pressure with frustration trying to get twin view to work in any sane manner , sure it would provide an excellent picture quality but only if I configured it each and every boot . to make a long story short I gave up and bought a mac mini ( my first apple product ever ) I plugged it in , game over it just worked and does so each and every boot without fiddling with it every time . I am a dedicated linux user but if they insist on pursuing bling rather than functionality Linux and Ubuntu will always remain a minor , niche OS .

ronacc said: people buy macs not just for the bling of the desktop , they buy macs because they just plain work , no muss no fuss .I built a dedicated multimedia box to hook up to my 42" lcd tv , and spent the next 2 years raising my blood pressure with frustration trying to get twin view to work in any sane manner , sure it would provide an excellent picture quality but only if I configured it each and every boot . to make a long story short I gave up and bought a mac mini ( my first apple product ever ) I plugged it in , game over it just worked and does so each and every boot without fiddling with it every time . I am a dedicated linux user but if they insist on pursuing bling rather than functionality Linux and Ubuntu will always remain a minor , niche OS .

Ok, I admit to having a thing or two against Apple but I didn't mean to be disrespectful to Apple product owners, ok? My bad :)

My personal issues with Apple have to do with me having to spend another bag of money and staying hours in a line every Christmas to buy a new phone for my wife that looks exactly the same as the last one one... I really don't get it (I'm an Android person, actually a Cylon).

I am no apple fanboy by any means I object to many of their policy's but that does not blind me to the fact that they do much right . I have been around computers since the 2 steves were building the first apples in jobs moms garage and that mini I mentioned was the first apple I had ever bought and to this day I only boot it when I want to watch a movie or sync my Ipad ( a later apple purchase ) , my day to day OS is and will remain Linux ( whether or not the particular flavor is Ubuntu ) .

ronacc said: people buy macs not just for the bling of the desktop , they buy macs because they just plain work , no muss no fuss .I built a dedicated multimedia box to hook up to my 42" lcd tv , and spent the next 2 years raising my blood pressure with frustration trying to get twin view to work in any sane manner , sure it would provide an excellent picture quality but only if I configured it each and every boot . to make a long story short I gave up and bought a mac mini ( my first apple product ever ) I plugged it in , game over it just worked and does so each and every boot without fiddling with it every time . I am a dedicated linux user but if they insist on pursuing bling rather than functionality Linux and Ubuntu will always remain a minor , niche OS .

One daughter and my son have Mac's. Any time I use them when visiting I look for keys I use all the time on linux that are not there on the Macs. I also look for functions like screen capture, crop, and print or email. Must be a way to do it, falling off a log for Ubuntu, haven't been successful yet on Macs. I also copy portions of web news, like on health, with mixed text, graphics, and picture and then paste into a write document. Must be a way to do that on the Macs, I haven't found it. That's not to mention the $$$$ for program packages....

My solution is to take along a netbook with linux when I visit them.

Jerry

jerrylamos said: One daughter and my son have Mac's. Any time I use them when visiting I look for keys I use all the time on linux that are not there on the Macs. I also look for functions like screen capture, crop, and print or email. Must be a way to do it, falling off a log for Ubuntu, haven't been successful yet on Macs. I also copy portions of web news, like on health, with mixed text, graphics, and picture and then paste into a write document. Must be a way to do that on the Macs, I haven't found it. That's not to mention the $$$$ for program packages....

My solution is to take along a netbook with linux when I visit them.

Jerry

I'm sure that if your son and daughter sat down in front of your computer, they'd be totally lost too. It has nothing to do with which os is easier to use, but what you are used to.

If you quit trying to use a mac the same way you use your linux based system, you'd find way more similarities than differences. Open a termianl and try some of the commands you use on your Linux system, you'll find most of them work the same way.

Disclaimer: the only mac I own that runs OSX is a blue ppc imac, that can't be upgraded any further than 10.4.

I don't think Ubuntu is planning to write a file manager, which is what they would have to do to replace Nautilus.

Besides, the Dash is transient. You open it, look for something, open the file, and the Dash hides again. People like to keep file manager windows open so they can quickly get back to the location they want to be to do file operations. They like having multiple ones open at the same time so they can compare folders, do copying, or just have different folders open for different tasks. The Dash will not replace Nautilus for this.

I like nautilus, I see the dash as complementing it rather than replacing it altogether (I hope)

M.

As a side effect, if more people decide to try the console, learn a little about it, "break the paradigm", notice that you can't really really start world war 3 by typing some commands (like Ferris did in War Games), I'd be very happy.

one of the reasons many people are reluctant to use the terminal is that they come mostly from a windows background where they are discouraged from using it . there are 2 main reasons for this , 1 MS wants to keep users as ignorant as possible and 2 it is so easy to break windows .

ronacc said: one of the reasons many people are reluctant to use the terminal is that they come mostly from a windows background where they are discouraged from using it . there are 2 main reasons for this , 1 MS wants to keep users as ignorant as possible and 2 it is so easy to break windows .

I agree entirely.

When people are introduced to a PC, they fear "breaking" it. People seem to believe in this myth that they will actually cause physical damage to the PC or other electronic objects close to it when using the console.

I, again, blame Matthew Broderick (War Games) and Keanu Reeves (Matrix) for perpetuating this myth.

I personally blame the mouse itself for making life too convenient, especially the digital optical mice with the laser pickup. Using a mouse slows you down but it does give you the luxury of leaning away from your desktop.

gsmanners said: I personally blame the mouse itself for making life too convenient, especially the digital optical mice with the laser pickup. Using a mouse slows you down but it does give you the luxury of leaning away from your desktop.

o rly?

lucazade said: o rly?

YA RLY :icon_frown:

It's an absolute fact that when you use the keyboard exclusively, applications function a lot quicker.

http://openkinect.org/wiki/Getting_Started

completely off topic but do you know of a hack to get Itunes working on linux ?

My wife asked me that everyday for a year. She wanted to sync iPod, Iphone, iPad, whatever but hates iTunes and is loving Ubuntu on her note...

I have managed to run that thing using Wine... There many tuts for that online.

As for replacements, I think none will do more than just write/read the thing as an external unit and update the apple index files.

This seems to be very popular: http://www.psychocats.net/ubuntu/itunes

thanks , I asked out of curiosity , I know I can access it as a mass storage device and really if I need something on there thats on one of my linux boxes I just email it to myself or sneaker net it over to my mac on a usb stick . thats one of the things that burns me about apple , OSX is based on BSD but they completely ignore us .

ronacc said: thanks , I asked out of curiosity , I know I can access it as a mass storage device and really if I need something on there thats on one of my linux boxes I just email it to myself or sneaker net it over to my mac on a usb stick . thats one of the things that burns me about apple , OSX is based on BSD but they completely ignore us .

I used cydia to put a openssh-server on my wife iPhone so, when she breaks it, I can ssh into it. It's the most messed up and weird file structure I have ever deal with. No wonder there are so many exploits for it.

gsmanners said: I personally blame the mouse itself for making life too convenient, especially the digital optical mice with the laser pickup. Using a mouse slows you down but it does give you the luxury of leaning away from your desktop.

I use keyboard when I can. Navigating around the screen with a keyboard can be a bear. The mouse can get me in the vicinity.

What's really dumbing down are the huge icons so people can point with their fingers, cave man, ugh me point, can't even read the alphabet example Windows desktop and Unity launcher and the BFB bringing up a screenful of icons that don't mean anything to me - I can actually read text, and you can get a lot! more information on the screen with readable text than the "pretty" (to whom?) hieroglyphics.

So why do I use Unity-2D? Because Unity is what we're testing.

Why not Unity-3D? My choice, I like nice crisp images not fuzzy borders and out-of-focus images. Of course, Compiz has to be one of the biggest buggy pieces of code in Launchpad. Besides, it chews up pc cycles in the background even when I'm running full screen and nothing Compiz is doing serves any purpose. Are pc's "so fast useless cycles don't matter"? When running a number of applications or video''s, cycles still do matter.

By the way, I still do have Lynx LTS partitions for downloads, network browse, gparted, ... seems a bit faster and crisper than higher overhead Unity. Lubuntu can do some things but I haven't figured out how to do network browse with pcmanfm, and by the time I would load in nautilus, Libre Office write, and Firefox I'm back to Lynx.

I saw one post on Planet Ubuntu that showed poor adoption of Unity compared to past releases. Anyone have any data?

Jerry

The reasons it seems that the uptake of Unity is slow, is that Firefox no longer includes any operating system in the info when it connects to a server. Go back and read the post again.

192.168.1.225 - - [26/Oct/2011:23:25:15 -0700] "GET /images/sidebar-top.jpg HTTP/1.1" 404 508 "http://willy/" "Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64) AppleWebKit/535.2 (KHTML, like Gecko) Ubuntu/12.04 Chromium/15.0.874.102 Chrome/15.0.874.102 Safari/535.2"

is what you get when connecting to a server using chromium

192.168.1.225 - - [29/Oct/2011:07:51:59 -0700] "GET /images/sidebar-top.jpg HTTP/1.1" 404 508 "http://willy/variant-multi.css" "Mozilla/5.0 (Ubuntu; X11; Linux x86_64; rv:8.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/8.0"

As you can see there is no mention of the operating system when connecting to a server using firefox.

qote AppleWebKit/535.2 (KHTML, like Gecko) Ubuntu/12.04 Chromium/15.0.874.102 Chrome/15.0.874.102 Safari/535.2"

applewebkit ---safari ????????

ronacc said: qote AppleWebKit/535.2 (KHTML, like Gecko) Ubuntu/12.04 Chromium/15.0.874.102 Chrome/15.0.874.102 Safari/535.2"

applewebkit ---safari ????????

If I remember correctly, Firefox had an ie compatability mode at one time. Apple owns patents on quite a bit of open source software, check out the details on the cups admin page.

I'm really not sure how the lens is going to do network share browsing. Even if it adds a "network" section that shows you CIFS shares, sometimes you need to specify something that isn't normally scanned for such as FTP to, for instance, upload files to an external server for a website. Plus even if it showed you CIFS shares, what would it show? Should it start scanning all files on the share? How would it differentiate between local and remote files?

Just one person's opinion but: gawd, I hope not. I try to avoid using the dash/lens as far as possible, which increasingly sums up my opinion of Unity. I use synapse for calling up apps or issuing commands - just simpler, smoother and requires less fiddling & faddling. The lens/dash just strike me as awkward and clumsy. I see no reason for the over-sized icons and the blurred background, somehow, makes discriminating between icons and objects more tiresome than in the crisp environment of a file browser.

There are also times when I want to interact with an app and the file browser, something I can't do with the current incarnation of the unity lens. It's either the focus of your desktop, or it's not there. So, at present, no; but I'm always open to at least trying out the paradigm.