discuss-gnustep
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: spatial finder


From: Rogelio M . Serrano Jr .
Subject: Re: spatial finder
Date: Thu, 17 Jun 2004 00:45:28 +0800

Hi All,

I dont see a distinction between the search application and the file browser anymore.

Regards
Rogelio

On 2004-06-16 21:13:05 +0800 "Sascha Erni, .rb" <rb@nggalai.com> wrote:

Hi there,

I do realise Rogelio was speaking of the Finder (i.e. search application) and not the File Viewer (i.e. file browser), but I'm in a talkative mood, and the way this discussion has been going irked me on somewhat. So please forgive my ranting. ;)

Enrico Sersale wrote:

On 2004-06-16 05:44:34 +0300 Rogelio Serrano <rogelio@smsglobal.net> wrote:

Can we use the new gworkspace finder in spatial mode?



What's that???


"Spatical mode" is usually used to describe file browsing behaviour. In short, file windows don't auto-sort when you open them but remember where you put each icon in prior sessions. Windows also remember their sizes, what view you had selected (large icons, small icons, list), and their positions on the desktop. Say you open the Applications directory with Ctrl+Doubleclick, a new window will open exactly where it was last time before you closed it, with all the icons arranged the way they were, without a "new" sorting taking place. So if you feel like putting all your text applications to the left, media applications to the top-right corner, and utilities to the bottom, that's the way the Application directory will look like until you move the applications again.

I do understand the importance of spatial information to develop "muscle memory," that you'll find stuff quicker even in real-life if you remember where you put it (obviously), but that's a problem, too: I have thousands of text documents, hundreds of images and PDF files. When I keep more than a dozen real-life magazines, I more or less automatically start piling them up, and am glad if I had the presence of mind to bring some order in the piling. Spatial mode is handy for containers--say, your documents directories are on one part of your desktop, application directories somewhere else, drive icons in-between--but with files? I'd have a mess in no time. I spent a lot of my early Mac time searching for documents because I lack the self-control to keep things tidy. That's what the computer's here for, in my opinion. And that's why I personally prefer a file browser which makes "browsing" as easy as possible.

One of the reasons I switched to GNUstep on my Linux box was GWorkspace's use of Miller Columns. I don't think I ever employed icon view for more than a screenshot or two. I even planned on spending $30 to get a Miller Columns file browser for Windows, but its development was stopped due to copyright reasons (I'm told) and it won't work properly on WinXP. For me, Miller Columns in combination with a content Inspector are the most logical way to browse in deeply-nested directory trees, but I guess that's simply a personal preference. On the other hand side, I can't understand how anybody would want 30 opened windows on their desktops just because they were looking for one file.

Most Windows users I know use the "Details" view combined with a directory tree to the left when file-browsing in Explorer. Reason being, everything's ordered either by name, file type, size, or change date, and you have a real chance of finding that three-months old document you're looking for. They then switch directories in the file tree, with the details view updating--sort of two-tier Miller Column browsing with a tree structure for directory switching. They use a "spatial" icon view only on the desktop, where they tend to put important documents in close reach of the drive icons and expect to find those documents next time they boot up. As a short-cut, so to say. I wouldn't mind that for my Linux desktop either, but that's what I have the Shelf for.

I was very, very pleased when I fired up OS-X on my iMac for the first time and was greeted by a Miller Columns browser, I have to say. I was less pleased by its inconsistencies. That's where I agree with the Ars Technica article linked to earlier in this thread--it's confusing if the view and positioning changes all the time. Also, Apple did sort of a hack-job with their column view by missing the importence of the shelf (or an easily user-adjustible location bar).

The most us mere users can hope for is that the devs will include many options of how you'd like things to behave. There's not much point in argueing about what's "better" or even "the right way to do it." *looks at this posting, shakes head, continues* Personal preferences as well as academic points of view are too diverse to settle for one, be-all end-all solution. Naturally, developers should stick to their idea of what was intended and prevent users from getting used to bad design and bad habits (Windows's Task Bar comes to mind), but ultimately? It's the users' choice what they want to work with, and how they want to work with it. So, in the end, I wouldn't mind GWorkspace becoming a bit more "spatial aware" than it is right now, but should it go down that road, it should try to do a better job at it than OS-X does at the moment.

93,
-Sascha.rb

P.S. oh, and I second Rogelio's vote for "search expressions icons." That would be nifty indeed. -.rb






reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]