TheBlackCat wrote:Annix, as we keep explaining not everyone thinks that spatial file management is as important as you do. Dolphin supports several different paradigms of file management, but it lacks support for one particularly inefficient and outdated paradigm.

No. It is efficient and is not outdated. Even more important is that it is the basic paradigm and one of the three classical paradigms, without which a file manager cannot be called in any respect universal.

The KDE4 devs just want to force everyone to use the file manager in the same way as they do.

Anything that results in opening dozens of windows you will never use is, practically be definition, inefficient.

TheBlackCat wrote:Anything that results in opening dozens of windows you will never use is, practically be definition, inefficient.

You would need to open dozens of windows if you have proper shortcuts on the desktop.

Contrary when you use navigational mode you cannot use drag and drop efficiently. I saw people who make cut and then navigate to another directory specifically to make paste. Then they navigate back etc.

As I explained before, it is easy to drag and drop from one folder to another with dolphin in a bunch of different ways.

You can:
1. open the folders you need in new windows
2. open the folders you need in new tabs
3. open the folders you need in a split view
4. use the breadcrumb bar (in certain situations)
5. use the tree view
6. use the columns view (in certain situations)
7. use places

There is no need to use cut and paste to move files from one folder to another, although it is certainly an option. Each of these has different advantages and disadvantages, so would be used in different situations (for instance you would not use places for a folder you use rarely, and you would not use the breadcrumb bar or columns view for folders that are not sub-folders of a folder in your existing path).

However, all of them have the advantage that only the folders you actually want to work with are open, instead of every folder you have visited.

The first two in particular have all the advantages of a spatial file browser, but have the added advantage that you only have to deal with the folders you actually need.

I personally almost never use cut and paste or copy and paste, I pretty much always use drag and drop using tabs or the breadcrumb bar (depending on where the target folder is relative to the current folder). The only time I ever use cut and paste is when I don't intend to go back to the source folder.

The first two in particular have all the advantages of a spatial file browser, but have the added advantage that you only have to deal with the folders you actually need.

And disadvantage that instead of simple clicking you have to click, choose a proper menu item and click again.

Well, this all is irrelevant.

Comparing a file manager which lacks such basic function with a normal file manager reminds me comparing an Android-based cell phone with a desktop computer. You can argue that it is more modern, easy to use, fashionable, even more powerful in computations. But as far as it lacks the basic, generally-agreed (even if used not by all users) functions of a personal computer, this comparison is meaningless.

Anixx wrote:And disadvantage that instead of simple clicking you have to click, choose a proper menu item and click again.

I guess your mouse doesn't have a middle button.

Anixx wrote:Comparing a file manager which lacks such basic function with a normal file manager reminds me comparing an Android-based cell phone with a desktop computer.

Luckily for us you don't get to define what is and is not "basic function". You keep asserting that it is "basic function", but so far you have provided no reason anyone would actually want to use it in practice.

By the way, how can you claim that this mode which is used in any modern desktop environment except KDE4 is "outdated"? Is it outdated because the KDE4 devs decided so? Why not then decide that the navigational mode introduced in DOS Shell is "outdated" or panel mode of Norton Commander is "outdated"?

I guess your mouse doesn't have a middle button.

I have wheel instead of middle button.

You keep asserting that it is "basic function", but so far you have provided no reason anyone would actually want to use it in practice.

Of course you know well what anyone would use in practice. Fortunately the developers of other desktop environments do not follow your guidelines.

Notice that I do not campaign for removal of other modes from the manager. It is you who wants to force anyone into using your paradigm.

You do know there is an "edit" button, right? Rather than posting three posts one after another, please use the "edit" functionality.

Anixx wrote:

I guess your mouse doesn't have a middle button.

I have wheel instead of middle button.

Then I have a surprise for you: the wheel is actually a button too!

Anixx wrote:By the way, how can you claim that this mode which is used in any modern desktop environment except KDE4 is "outdated"? Is it outdated because the KDE4 devs decided so? Why not then decide that the navigational mode introduced in DOS Shell is "outdated" or panel mode of Norton Commander is "outdated"?

Anixx wrote:

You keep asserting that it is "basic function", but so far you have provided no reason anyone would actually want to use it in practice.

Of course you know well what anyone would use in practice. Fortunately the developers of other desktop environments do not follow your guidelines.

The burden is on you to show why your proposal is a good one. "Because we have always done it that way" or "because everyone else does it that way" is not a good reason for anything. You need to show some evidence that your approach actually makes sense.

I should note that many, if not most, file managers turn the features off by default.

Anixx wrote:Notice that I do not campaign for removal of other modes from the manager. It is you who wants to force anyone into using your paradigm.

I am not saying anyone should be forced to do anything. What I am saying is:

1. The fact that dolphin does not have this mode is not as big a deal as you make it out to be
2. We should only include a feature when there is some valid arguments why that feature is a good one (tradition and herd mentality or not good reasons).

@Anixx:

Dolphin is a navigational file manager which doesn't support a spatial view. What exactly is wrong with that? Spatial view is not a "basic file management" function - it is a different paradigm, as you said yourself. The Dolphin developers have chosen to focus on one mode, navigational, and made a fully functional navigational file manager.

Now we could go on and on and argue which representation is the best, spatial or navigational, but that's beside the point. Navigational mode is a well-proven concept that many users are familiar with. Dolphin is a navigational file manager. End of story.

Nobody forces you to use Dolphin as a file manager. If you prefer to use a spatial file manager, use a spatial file manager - Dolphin is clearly not for you.

Then I have a surprise for you: the wheel is actually a button too!

Yes, but it is difficult to use it as button. And remember when you should push left button (on the desktop icon, for example) and when the wheel.

The burden is on you to show why your proposal is a good one.

I do not want to persuade you to use it. It is necessary for me. If you interested why other users prefer this mode, I can refer you to the heated discussions in the Gnome project about what mode should be the default. For some people this mode is so self-evident as the default so some desktop environments have only spatial mode (E17, ROX, OS/2).

And it is not my proposal. It is one of the features which were removed from KDE. It is still on the removers to show why I do not need this function.

The fact that dolphin does not have this mode is not as big a deal as you make it out to be

For whom?

We should only include a feature when there is some valid arguments why that feature is a good one

For you any argument is "invalid" unless you would use it. If you personally do not use this mode, what argument can be "valid" for you?

Dolphin is a navigational file manager which doesn't support a spatial view. What exactly is wrong with that?

Nothing. Just do not say that Dolphin is focused on file management. Say the truth: Dolphin is focused on navigational file management.

Nobody forces you to use Dolphin as a file manager. If you prefer to use a spatial file manager, use a spatial file manager - Dolphin is clearly not for you.

Okay, but KDE4 lacks a spatial file manager.

Anixx wrote:Yes, but it is difficult to use it as button.

You are the first person I have heard say this.

Anixx wrote:And remember when you should push left button (on the desktop icon, for example) and when the wheel.

It is two buttons, is it really that hard to remember? It is also not like this is unique to dolphin, either, this is how pretty much every Linux web browser and many linux file managers work.

Anixx wrote:And it is not my proposal. It is one of the features which were removed from KDE. It is still on the removers to show why I do not need this function.

This is a discussion about dolphin. It was never in dolphin to begin with. There is a bug in konqueror, a bug you didn't bother to file a bug report for (I ended up doing it myself).

Anixx wrote:

The fact that dolphin does not have this mode is not as big a deal as you make it out to be

For whom?

I mean in a general sense. I have provided justification why I think this, you have not provided any justification for thinking otherwise.

Anixx wrote:

We should only include a feature when there is some valid arguments why that feature is a good one

For you any argument is "invalid" unless you would use it. If you personally do not use this mode, what argument can be "valid" for you?

I am not so closed-minded that I have to use something myself in order to see the merit of it. In fact I routinely submit wishlist items for features I never intend to use because I feel they would be useful for others.

It could certainly be the case that spatial file management is a great feature for certain use-cases. If that were true, I would be all for supporting it even though none of those use-cases apply to me (or I might even start using it myself). However, you have provided no such use-cases.

I ended up doing it myself.

I gave you a link to the bugreport. Did you submit it again second time?

In fact I routinely submit wishlist items for features I never intend to use because I feel they would be useful for others.

In that case you should not doubt spatial mode would be useful for others. Just consider how many users use it, and read the Gnome mailing list.

I don't like Dolphin much either, but frankly I don't know anyone who uses a file manager in spatial mode (and I'm in a position where I set up computers for other users all teh time). Tabs and split screens are always more efficient than extra windows. Extra windows are of the devil. Most people I know who use Gnome with Nautilus get rid of the "open in a new window" default at once.