What is Digg?Sponsored by HTC
Who knows you better than your phone? view!
youtube.com - See you from the perspective of your phone.
44 Comments
- schestowitz, on 10/12/2007, -5/+10Seen it submitted earlier (but I'll shut up).
The abstraction and modularity of Linux is what facilitates so much choice. There's room for customisation depending on hardware specs, nature of work, type of files handled, remote/local (any X?) etc. Anyone who is for the one size fits all approach (e.g. explorer.exe) is possibly deluded, IMO. Choice is not detrimental. - Lobosch, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4There is a vast amount of file managers for *nix OSes, and imho the survey misses some good ones:
X Northern Captain - an mc-like file manager for x
gnome-commander - gnome counterpart of krusader
rox-filer - gtk+, similar to thunar
vifm - file management vi style - ace77, on 10/12/2007, -4/+8Another story where the poster ignored the DUPE warning.
- ZaNkY, on 10/12/2007, -3/+6I apologize if this is in fact a dupe. The dupe filter didn't show anything similar when I tried to submit.... but if this is in fact a dupe, Sorry!
I do not ignore the dupe filter Ace.
--ZaNkY - pllb, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3The most widely used are konq and nautilus. I'd say both are usable but konq is more advanced and better integrated. Thunar is still young but seems promising. The thing about Nautilus is development is very slow. I'm interested to see how Konq is improved in KDE4.
- krazykit, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4Wrong, astrosmash. You can use the best of each. You could run KDE's taskbar in Gnome if you liked simply by running "kicker". Similarly, you could add Gnome's taskbar in KDE by running "gnome-panel". Nautilus and Konqueror can be used in either environment, as can any other program.
- HonoredMule, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3vifm is mentioned, and linked.
- overlordmead, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4@astromash
I use Amarok and a few other KDE apps every day in Gnome every day so I don't know what you mean. I'm not too impressed with the K* libs that come along for the ride but my system still measures less bloat than a standard XP session. - nofxjunkee, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2in X I like to use thunar, krusader, and konqueror (in that order).
but to be honest zsh is difficult to beat once you learn some of the extended globbing syntax. even without extended globbing completion alone makes navigation a snap in a shell. half of the time when I want to use a GUI file manager it's launched from an xterm... - Xilon, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Thunar is my favorite. It's small, fast, extensable (plugin support), and most importantly has minimalism and intuition in mind. It has mouse gestures (not too advanced, only 3 or 4 functions afaik) and a nice "Compact List" view, much like the Windows Explorer List view, which I kind of miss on Linux (details view works find though). It has many features that other file managers don't, features that I really like. It fits me like a glove :)
Openbox + Thunar = perfection :)
ps. imo. - AlexMax, on 10/12/2007, -2/+4@astrosmash
Find someone who cares about your objectives, work on it yourself, or GTFO. That's how FOSS works, either work on it yourself, support someone who cares about your needs, or go pay money for someone to listen to you make demands. - r121, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3I think this whole article was a list of Nautilus replacements :-)
- williebee, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3Konqueror + kio_locate does it for me.
- pauldonnelly, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1What no mention of using the command line rather than some irritating file manager? What is the author thinking, recommending that you learn to use a text-mode file manager "for the rare time you need it". When are you ever going to find yourself on a system that has only text mode and also happens to have your own choice of file manager installed. Mightn't it be better just to learn to use a command line?
- cynicist, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1spootwo, directory structure? It hasn't changed much in a long time. Personally I like the way its done, I just wish all of my programs would throw their icons in /usr/share/icons like they are supposed to.
- democracysucks, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Anyone know of any good Nautilus replacements?
I love Gnome, but Nautilus is the bane of my Linux-based existence. - AlexMax, on 10/12/2007, -3/+4ignore this, meant to reply
- BlackAdderIII, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1You can have a konqueror instance working in root/super user mode, this is pretty standard stuff in KDE - is that what you mean?
- HonoredMule, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Performance is the most important factor though. It would also rock if one of these actually worked for manipulations of ALL files (i.e. allows itself to run with root authority). I spend most of my "fixing" time in linux trying to convince linux to let me undo the damage caused by broken scripts, or perform system operations manually because I don't wanna write a sonnet in code just to make a simple change.
- HonoredMule, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1I never knew about Krusader, which looks WAY better than Konqueror, to me. Now I'm all excited to try it out, as I spend a lot of time browsing files in any OS. I really gotta find the time to get Sabayon installed. :)
Thunar looks nice too, as I love a well-implemented minimalist approach. - BlackAdderIII, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1You wouldn't be the first regular gnome user to use konqueror as their normal file manager, if you want a very featureful/non-infuriating replacement for nautilus.
- genetic, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1emelfm is my current file manager under X. it's a two pane design thats blazing fast and highly configurable.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2> I have neither the time nor the inclination to have a flame war with somebody make broad, general,
> flametarded comments like KDE and Gnome mix like oil and water without explaining themselves.
You're not very good at this, are you? The post to which you originally replied was nothing but an explanation why KDE and Gnome don't mix.
You're very good at childish name calling, but again you address *none* of my points. Run along, then. - Xilon, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Yeah thunar would probably be the beset replacement (at least imo), but it doesn't support browsing Samba shares yet and probably a few other features are missing, so it would be a good idea to have both on hand.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2@ AlexMax
I "GTFO" a long time ago and I'm not demanding anything. I'm merely trying to explain for the fact that the modern "Linux Desktop" doesn't matter much to anyone besides first-year CS students. Perhaps you have a better explanation? I mean, the Linux Desktop is right where I left it 5 years ago, which is nowhere, despite all of the work that has gone into both the KDE and Gnome efforts. Why?
As far as running Gnome and KDE side by side, these two frameworks interoperate only at the most basic XLib level, which is not very much at all. You cannot cut and paste anything but plain text between them, you cannot drag and drop between them, Gnome apps do not know about the KDE desktop, folders or preferences, and KDE apps do not know about the Gnome desktop, folders, and preferences. They can't even agree in which order to place the 'OK/Cancel' buttons. These two frameworks are fundamentally opposed and you cannot mix them on the same desktop without getting poison.
99% of the world's desktops do not have these problems. People who try to tout these problems as strengths are delusional. Sure, it makes a "neat" environment for CS students to play in, but that's about it. - genetic, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1sudo emelfm
now in wonderful root mode - BlackAdderIII, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1@astro.
Not only are you talking crap about gnome and KDE (I mean drag and drop does work between them and URLs are passed between the two just fine, they'e happy to work with each other's multimedia stuff and have been for yonks, they support use of each others' desktop widgets, dock apps and apps, and there's even unification of IPC happening through DBus, Multimedia and file system indexing support - sorry to piss on your bonfire), but looking at your link, you're pointing to Firefox - which isn't even a gnome application!
It's a separate infrastructure from XFCE/Gnome/KDE or the Mac/Windows desktops and toolkits, and any desktop integration or lack thereof is implemented by the mozilla/firefox developers - which has nothing to do with gnome, KDE or Linux.
For your information, even where there is some friendly rivalry, there's more respect and interchange of ideas/technological support between the desktops than you seem to realise.
I'm sick of people - who haven't the slightest idea what they're talking about - whipping out some fake unix credentials and bagging our hard work.
You're a *****, and not even a good one, and that gets boring fast. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2Damn, you first-year kids slay me. Like an ass, you're quick to refute arguments that no one is making.
You should learn to read more carefully rather than fly off the handle each time you read something you don't understand, kid. Tell me, how many times did I fail to qualify the word "Linux" with "Desktop"? Nowhere do say that Unix is a bad server a solution, and nowhere do I say that Linux isn't a fine Unix.
KDE and Gnome are attempts at a consumer-oriented alternatives to Windows and OS X, and those attempts have been, and continue to be, piss poor. As a result, no one uses Linux as a consumer-oriented desktop outside of CS students. This, despite the free price tag, easy install, and good karma. Care to refute any of those facts, junior? Perhaps you have another reason why Desktop Linux doesn't matter to anyone?
You will learn that professionals who use Linux to do real work do not use any of that crap because 1. it hasn't been around for very long in any stable form, and 2. it sucks. Professionals use emacs, an xterm, a web browser, and whatever specific Unix applications they need to run.
You were eager to demonstrate that you know what a library is, but again you failed to understand what you were reading. Let me spell it out for you, big guy. The Gnome project cannot and does not take advantage of any technology written for the KDE project, and vice versa. Furthermore, running KDE and Gnome apps side-by-side sucks for all the reasons I listed in my original post. Gnome and KDE mix like oil and water, and interoperate in a way that makes Windows 1.0 seem advanced in comparison.
Look junior, you will learn, as everyone else eventually does, that the user-choice so highly touted on the Linux Desktop is nothing but a myth. On *real* systems, the developer's choice of SDK has little or no effect on the user. Yet, on the Linux Desktop, the developer's choice between Gnome and KDE has a profound and unacceptable effect on their user, and the user has absolutely no say in the matter.
Gnome/KDE developers have far too many choices. Their users have none. This is why KDE and Gnome do not matter to anyone important. - spootwo, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1Having tried to sell my friends on Linux, I've found that the directory structure is the biggest stumbling block. A lot of progress has been made, but the average user is used to seeing things from Windows Explorer's perspective. I tried a test version of Xandros and saw their file manager / system did this...but it's not really Open Source, so it wasn't a good option.
- sanguinemoon, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0You are correct, sir! Also dugg up for acknowledging that these are not really "linux" file managers. I can use any of these that I want on my PCBSD desktop
- sanguinemoon, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0From a Windows perspective, you normally launch an application from the menu. You put personal files where you want, you can even make a folder called "My Documents" in the home directory if you want.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1XTree ftw!
- sanguinemoon, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Try Thunar. I presume you're using Gnome, so this will work well as a replacement in that enviroment
- sanguinemoon, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1Astro,
You don't even have any real points, at all. In my years of using unix-like operating system, never once have my choices been limited by any developer's choice of toolkits. That's right. Not a single time! I can use what "feature" I want out of KDE when running Gnome, or vice/versa. Here's an out for you, so do not think that me uncharitable: what "features" do you mean, precisely? My guess is that you don't even know.
What it sounds like is that when you tried tried linux 5 years ago, for whatever reason it didn't work out for you and now for some pathetic reason you're trolling here. But your trolls are little more than simply repeating some nonsense that you saw on a some clueless MS fanboy site.
You said: "you cannot drag and drop between them" Sorry, but I've done this :p
You said " Gnome apps do not know about the KDE desktop, folders or preferences," Yes and no, since this is just trying to rattle off a list. Let's see, Gnome aps not knowing "KDE" folders is just stupid. Folders are from the file system and not the desktop. There is no such thing as a KDE or Gnome, etc folder :p
Gnome apps not knowing about KDE preferences: Now there is an option in Kcontrol to apply KDE colors to none KDE apps, but I can let you have this. Sometimes it takes some tweaking to get KDE apps to look "right" on a Gnome desktop (due to font and color peferences, etc). But that's ok and not a weakness. I contend that, just for example, Amarok and Rythm Box are better because of the existence of the other one. Here we have user choice driving improvements! Meanwhile neither is the bloated monstrousity with a bizarre interface that goes by the name of Windows Media Player.
Having user choice of desktop enviroments is a strength and not a weakness of *nix. Microsoft and Apple are the ones that limit user choice.
Those things are now addressed, but I don't consider them points. I wonder what your motivation is? You don't like *nix, fine. Use something you do like. - thomashauk, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0You mean gksudo emelfm
And have you taken a look at emelfm2? - CGA1, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0"Performance is the most important factor though. It would also rock if one of these actually worked for manipulations of ALL files (i.e. allows itself to run with root authority)."
You can run Krusader in root mode. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1> ... you're pointing to Firefox - which isn't even a gnome application!
On X11, the native layer of Mozilla's cross-platform UI toolkit is GTK.
> It's a separate infrastructure from XFCE/Gnome/KDE or the Mac/Windows
> desktops and toolkits, and any desktop integration or lack thereof is
> implemented by the mozilla/firefox developers - which has nothing to do with
> gnome, KDE or Linux.
So, how does a developer implement drag-and-drop between the KDE desktop using the GTK? The reality is that Gnome and KDE branch off at a ridiculously low level, especially considering that most of this stuff was figured out in the 80s.
Of course it's up to the developer. My point is, on the Linux Desktop it's unnecessarily difficult to develop an application that works well in both "desktops". And if you factor in the fundamentally opposed human interface guidelines between the two, it's impossible.
> I'm sick of people - who haven't the slightest idea what they're talking about - whipping
> out some fake unix credentials and bagging our hard work.
My usual response to developers who complain about users is "try writing better software", but the truth is I think there's some fantastic and impressive work being done in both KDE and Gnome, has been for some time. The problem is that this work has been and continues to be ignored. This is due not to technical reasons, but to politics, poor leadership, and a lack of vision. Your hard work has been and continues to be flushed down the toilet, and that's what I take issue with. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1Your childish characterizations of who you think I am or what you think my motivations are a just ***** idiotic.
> I can use what "feature" I want out of KDE when running Gnome, or vice/versa.
> Here's an out for you, so do not think that me uncharitable: what "features" do
> you mean, precisely?
Which do you prefer: Gnome Open/Save dialogs or KDE Open/Save dialogs? If the Linux Desktop was about choice, you would be able to choose that which you prefer and have that choice applied to every application you use. Instead, the "choice" YOU speak of is that you can choose to use an application that wasn't designed to run on YOUR desktop, and it will suck, but that's your choice.
> "you cannot drag and drop between them" Sorry, but I've done this :p
Please share with us these two apps, which would be an exception to the rule if they actually do exist.
There's no shortage of problems people experience when mixing Gnome and KDE. Here is but one simple example I found in 3 seconds on Google:
http://www.kde-forum.org/artikel/14864/FireFox-Drag--Drop.html
Firefox is a typical example. Even though Mozilla's cross-platform toolkit predates Gnome and KDE, the Mozilla devs are forced to choose between the two. A KDE user has no say in which toolkit the Firefox developers choose. Mozilla went with Gnome, and KDE users suffer as a result. This is a serious problem for both users and developers.
> Let's see, Gnome aps not knowing "KDE" folders is just stupid. Folders
> are from the file system and not the desktop. There is no such thing as
> a KDE or Gnome, etc folder :p
You're obviously not aware of this, but Gnome and KDE could not even agree where the Desktop folder should be. Gnome and KDE are selfishly developed in complete ignorance of one another, to the detriment of their users as well as application developers.
> Having user choice of desktop enviroments is a strength and not a weakness of *nix
No, the lack of a standardized toolkit has severely crippled X11 application development, going all the way back to the license issues that prevented Motif adoption. At a technical level, it's extremely difficult for a developer (e.g., Mozilla) to make their application (e.g., Firefox) work well for *all* of their users regardless of their "choice" of desktop. And due to the lack of common human-interface-guidelines between Gnome and KDE, the task essentially becomes impossible.
> Microsoft and Apple are the ones that limit user choice.
They limit neither user nor developer choice. By your logic, Microsoft would be better off by developing two "competing" Explorer.exe shells, and letting the user choose between them. Furthermore, there's nothing preventing anyone from developing alternate shells for the Macintosh or Windows. People have developed alternatives, and by and large they've proven to be extremely unpopular and unnecessary. (Although, there's a Finder replacement for the Mac that a handful of people like)
Instead, Apple and Microsoft have *extensible* platforms with standard human-interface guidelines, the advantage being that applications written for these platforms can be utilized by *all* of their users regardless of which API or toolkit the developer chooses. That is a claim that no Linux Desktop application can make, and if you don't think that's a problem you're a fool (or a CS student who simply likes to play, which is fine, but you'll grow out of it). - ace77, on 10/12/2007, -2/+1@ZaNkY
No problem man. Sorry if I was a little rude on my comment but my fingers were faster than my brain :-)
I think digg should improve how duplicate stories are managed. - sudonim, on 10/12/2007, -2/+1The newer versions of nautilus are actually quite usable. To be honest, its basically a finder ripoff in most ways but the fact is that it works great. I had some serious stability issues with nautilus back on opensuse but the version of nautilus in the current version of ubuntu is definatly worth a try.
Alternatives if you really can't get over nautilus would have to start with thunar. Xfce with thunar is really snappy and quick on nearly any system. - sanguinemoon, on 10/12/2007, -2/+0astrosmash,
I have no idea why I'm bothered to answer your asinine, because clearly you have no understanding of how *nix or the desktop managers work and I have doubts that you ever even used any form of *nix long enough to get familiar with it.
"Gnome cannot take advantage of KDE technology"
What is "KDE technology?" KDE is simply a desktop created using the QT toolkit. There is no such thing as "KDE technology" in the way that speak of all. Gnome is of course made from the GTK libraries. There are other desktops as, such as XFCE (also uses GTK) You can more or less you "Gnome" applications on a KDE desktop or vice versa. You don't need the other desktop installed, you just need the libraries, which would normally be installed anyway. This is where the one of the strengths of the *nix desktop become appearant and that is user choice.
Like a fool, you trolled that Linux is relegated to first your cs students. IBM, I suppose is composed of first year cs students. As is Ford. And Amazon, etc. If you look at Netscraft, just as another example you notice that the majority of the major hosting companies use some form of *nix (http://uptime.netcraft.com/perf/reports/performance/Hosters?tn=november_2006) and the top 7 most reliable one use either Linux or FreeBSD. I suppose those are composed of first year cs students as well?
Here's another point: When you troll, make sure you have some concept of what you're talking about. A good troll is subtle at first, and actually gets the other users arguing among themselves. The puppet master grins as he pulls the other user's strings. - sanguinemoon, on 10/12/2007, -2/+0Hey, Astro
Whatever, troll. You said you used it back in 2001. I've first used it in 1995 and continuosly used it since late 2001 since a few weeks ago I decided to try PCBSD. I do suspected that a lot diggers are new to Linux (no offense, guys. Linus himself was a new user to Minix at one point :) ) But, Astro, you're out of your depth, little kid. I have neither the time nor the inclination to have a flame war with somebody make broad, general, flametarded comments like KDE and Gnome mix like oil and water without explaining themselves. I know why you don't elaborate. It's because you can't. You're copying and pasting some other rant from a Windows fanboy and really have no idea what you're saying at all. Like an a Billgatesbuttboy, you said that I'll learn that the user choice is myth. In my more than a decade experience with *nix , I learned the exact opposite. Further. IBM switching to Linux desktop must not be "real" systems.....somebody better let them know! Sorry, Windows fanboy boys, but *nix is the future; and even BSD is starting its long crawl out of the server room too.
Anyway, I won't bother answering anymore of your trollings :) You keep spouting about not being able to use technology written for the Gnome project and viceversa without specifing what "technologies" these are, which leaves to me to believe you don't even know :) But the result isn't less choice for the user than say Windows or OSX by any stretch of your feverish imagination.
Anyway, gotta run and I think you outta go ahead and let your mommy use her AOL account now. You've been hogging it for too long already. - ShyGuy91284, on 10/12/2007, -3/+1rox FTW!
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -12/+4Who's delusional? The Linux desktop has never been about choice, but about boundaries. Boundaries that exist not for technical reasons but political reasons, and for a general inability to organize.
Gnome cannot take advantage of KDE technology, and KDE cannot take advantage of Gnome technology. Users cannot pick and choose the best features from Gnome nor KDE. It's either one or the other, and if they're mixed together that's when real the weaknesses of the Linux desktop become apparent. Until the Linux desktop community organizes and builds a single *extensible* architecture on which all developers and users can focus their energy Linux as a desktop will continue to be relegated to the dorm rooms of first-year CS students.
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is