I really like folder view, but I would really like to see it go one step further. I want my desktop to BE a file manager. That is, when I click on a folder in folder view, I want the folder to open IN FOLDER VIEW (not dolphin). Is this possible with the current technology? If not, is there any chance of this becoming possible in the future?
-Ista

To answer your questions, no and no. This idea has already been submitted and the conclusion was that this is not what folder view was designed for so it won't be implemented. To see the discussion on the topic, please see KDE Bug Report 171889. It may, at some point, be implemented as a separate plasmoid but folderview will not support it.

Heh, that's my bugreport . I still think it makes sense to open folders inside folderview. As it happens, apple is implementing something simillar in os x 10.6. In 10.5 you can put folders in the dock that are opened as a stack. But any subfolders are opened in separate finder-window. In 10.6 you can open subfolders inside the stack itself, eliminating the need to rely on separate filemanager.

Oh well... Maybe KDE will implement it when they notice that it does indeed work. It's too bad that it needs to be a proprietary os that needs to show them that.

Janne wrote:As it happens, apple is implementing something simillar in os x 10.6. In 10.5 you can put folders in the dock that are opened as a stack. But any subfolders are opened in separate finder-window. In 10.6 you can open subfolders inside the stack itself, eliminating the need to rely on separate filemanager.

That is what the "quick access" plasmoid does already. That is why I suggested using the quickacces code to open folders in folderview in that bug report.

I still don't understand the rationale of having folderview-plasmoid that can't open folders, and then have another plasmoid that is practically identical to folderview, except for the fact that it CAN open folders...

Janne wrote:I still don't understand the rationale of having folderview-plasmoid that can't open folders, and then have another plasmoid that is practically identical to folderview, except for the fact that it CAN open folders...

... And I don't understand the rationale of re-implementing something that is working perfectly with dolphin. What's next? Re-inventing kwin inside plasma?(1)
Desktop and apps are two different worlds. Keep them different, please.

(1) I cannot find the link now, but believe it or not someone suggested this already...

Twenty years later, and we still haven't managed to catch up with OS/2!

Oops, didn't know I was restarting an old debate. My opinion is that the conventional desktop is a waste. I'm switching to Kubuntu from OS X. In that system, the desktop is essentially just a Finder window that takes up the whole screen. That got me thinking: why not make the desktop a file browser? I was hoping that folder view might make that possible, but I can understand that is not it's purpose. I still think it's a cool idea...

RGB wrote:
... And I don't understand the rationale of re-implementing something that is working perfectly with dolphin.

By that logic, couldn't we just as well say "why should we have icons on the desktop (or in folderview), when we already have icons in Dolphin?"...

Why use folderview for this, as opposed to using Dolphin? Because something I do not want to run a separate app. If I'm doing some very basic filemanagement (like, traversing folders), why should I launch a separate filemanager for that task? Why should I launch a complicated app to take care of a simple task?

Hell, we can drill down folders in the file-dialog! Why doesn't that launch Dolphin as well? In just about everywhere in the desktop, when you click on a folder, it's opened inside that app (filemanager, file-dialog etc.). Folderview is the exception to that rule.

Desktop and apps are two different worlds. Keep them different, please.

We are not talking about apps vs. desktops, we are talking about filemanagement. And folderview already is a lightweight filemanager, just like the desktop was in KDE3. Are you saying that folderview should not open any folders, since Dolphin can already open folders? I'm sorry, but that arguments makes zero sense... By that logic you should not be able to use Krunner to launch apps, since you can already use Kickoff to launch apps... You should not be able to use Dolphin to select a music-file and play it back, since you can already do that in Amarok....

The point I was making in my bugreport is that the fact that clikcing a folder in folderview is a jarring experience, since it opens Dolphin, instad of just opening the folder. I didn't ask it to launch Dolphin, I asked it to open the folder. And since folderview is alrady capable of displaying files, folders and their contents, it's just rational to expect it to be able to open folders. We already know that folderview is capable of displaying contents of folders, since that's the task it does alrady. To have it launch Dolphin seems like an arbitary limitation to me.

You are taking my argument too far, it seems... As you say, folderview is for simple file management tasks, and browsing the filesystem is not a simple task. To see the contents of subfolders without launching dolphin, you have the Quick Access plasmoid: for anything more complex than that, use the right tool.
In one of my activities, I have several folderviews. I also use the Quick Access to "browse" the subfoders on my project's main folder, because this is the easiest way to open files.
Full stop. For file management, I use the file manager.
My point is that by adding more and more stuff to plasma you are bluring the difference between plasma and apps, and this is a bad idea: you will end with two layers of apps for the same tasks.

PD: I don't use kickof, only krunner

Its not that you SHOULDN'T be able to do what you want, its just that you shouldn't expect that specific plasmoid to behave as you want it to. The folder view plasmoid is designed to provide STATIC access to a specific set of files/folders. If it were allowed to change to a different folder, then the STATIC access would be lost, people would be forced to dig back to the first screen every time they want to get at one of those files they placed specifically in a folderview on their desktop.

What your looking for is a different plasmoid designed around a different purpose. Quick Access is one, but it won't go on the desktop nicely (I'm not sure why it doesn't, maybe try talking to the dev about that, though I can see it being a design decision) Plasma is flexible. It is relatively easy for someone to make a new or alternative component for the desktop. Plasmoids aren't supposed to be 'one size fits all' miniapps on the desktop, they're supposed to be interfaces providing a specific form of access to a specific set of data. Hopefully, with the api becoming stable, and the scripting bindings improving (as well as the eventual release of PlasMate) we will see more diverse plasmoids suiting all kinds of specific needs.

[/rant]

okay, anyone for cookies and milk?

izahn wrote:That got me thinking: why not make the desktop a file browser?

In KDE1, it was! The desktop and the file manager were the same application (kfm). But Steve is right that the desktop should be static. Otherwise you never know where you are.

RGB wrote:You are taking my argument too far, it seems... As you say, folderview is for simple file management tasks, and browsing the filesystem is not a simple task.

I would say that opening a folder is just about the most simple filemanagement-task there is....

To see the contents of subfolders without launching dolphin, you have the Quick Access plasmoid:

Which is not the same as folderview....

Full stop. For file management, I use the file manager.

So remove those folderviews then. I mean, you are already using them for filemanagement. By your logic, you should be using Dolphin instead.

My point is that by adding more and more stuff to plasma you are bluring the difference between plasma and apps, and this is a bad idea: you will end with two layers of apps for the same tasks.

We already have Lionmail, which is an email-client built with Plasma. How is that not "repolicating functionality of apps"? And folderview already replicates Dolphin on some ways.

We should not have arbitary separation between apps and plasmoids. If something makes sense, it should be done, instead of thinking "oh no, we can't do that because it would turn the plasmoid in to an app, and we can't have that!".

And how woudl you define what is an app and what is not? Why isn't folderview an app? Why isn't Lionmail an app? Why isn't the Twitter-client an app?

PD: I don't use kickof, only krunner

That's duplication of functionality. You should use only Kickoff for launching apps.

SteveMcQwark wrote:Its not that you SHOULDN'T be able to do what you want, its just that you shouldn't expect that specific plasmoid to behave as you want it to. The folder view plasmoid is designed to provide STATIC access to a specific set of files/folders.

Again: an arbitary definition which arbitarily cripples the plasmoid.

If it were allowed to change to a different folder, then the STATIC access would be lost, people would be forced to dig back to the first screen every time they want to get at one of those files they placed specifically in a folderview on their desktop.

Negative. The folderview could restore the original view after the user opens a file inside folderview. Or after certain amount of inactivity. Those are just few examples.

What your looking for is a different plasmoid designed around a different purpose.

Seriously: being able to just open a frigging folder is not a radically different approach that requires a whole new plans and design. We are talking about an extremely simple concept here: opening a folder. We would be replicating the behavior of just about every other system in KDE. If I open a folder in Dolphin, it's opened inside Dolphin. If I open a fodler in file-dialog, it's opened in the file-dialog. If I open a fodler in folderview inside folderview, I get a short pause as the system loads a full-blown filemanager to open the folder...

Quick Access is one, but it won't go on the desktop nicely

If it did, then it would basically be identical to fodlerview. Some developer already described Quick Access as "folderview for the panel", and that is merely the same thing as folderview in a different form-factor.

If we were to keep the two separate, then we would have two plasmoids that were about 98% identical to each other. Only difference would be that one of them opens folders, the other one does not. Try explaining the difference of the two to an outsider, and the reply you would get would be a puzzled "huh?".

Plasmoids aren't supposed to be 'one size fits all' miniapps on the desktop, they're supposed to be interfaces providing a specific form of access to a specific set of data.

Why would ability to open folders change that?

Everything here is turning too heated for my taste, so I'll say only one thing before filling my kettle (someone want a green tea? ):
If you open a folder inside the folderview you will need a way to went back. If you need a way to went back you will need a toolbar with navigation buttons, history, maybe bookmarks etc, etc. If you need a toolbar with navigation buttons, history, maybe bookmarks etc, etc you really need a file browser!
My folderviews are not used as file browsers: I use them as static file launchers.
But don't worry: plasma is flexible. I'm sure someone will implement what you want: you will use it, other people will not.
That's all.
That's the beauty of free software, I think.
Peace, people!