Linked by Thom Holwerda on Mon 31st Mar 2008 19:28 UTC
Thread beginning with comment 307496
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[4]: Comment by Boldie
by segedunum on Tue 1st Apr 2008 12:18
in reply to "RE[3]: Comment by Boldie"
This is not the case on OS X
OS X does at least have the ability to create a new folder in a save dialogue.
...which is widely reputed to be one of the most usable operating systems around......Gnome's file dialogs share a lot in common with OS X's file dialogs.....
"Oh, OSX does stuff like this!" is not a valid justification, nor is the perception that OS X is some kind of usability oracle. For some reason that attitude seems to pervade everyone who associates themselves with Gnome. You see people spinning on Mac forums like this as well.
in that they are minimalistic in design
I love watching people squirm coming up with reasons for stuff like this.
A file dialog should only deal with opening and saving files.
No, that is not what an open, and especially a save dialogue, is supposed to do, and it just shows how people have been brainwashed by this stuff. A file dialogue is there for you to provide a file path for opening. Certainly in the case of saving, that file path doesn't exist, because the file itself doesn't yet exist. The file dialogue should then do what it needs to do to make that file path resolvable, including creating any folders that don't exist and giving the user the tools to achieve that. If you can't then you can't create a file path.
A file dialogue is a tool used to save and open file paths, not individual files. If that was the case you would have a system with no directory structure where all files would be saved in the root directory. Then the arguments would make sense.
Logically, taking this approach you can argue that file dialogues should not be creating file paths at all in any way, and thus, when saving you should create a file of the type you need in Nautilus first and then navigate to it in the save dialogue of the application so it can be saved. When you install a piece of software and it goes through the wizard, and you then come to the part where you decide where you want it installed, if the file path doesn't exist should it say "I'm sorry, you need to create the file path and any folders first through Nautilus"?
When you're part of a niche who thinks they're doing things cool and different, you can get away with this stuff. When you have more people using your desktop this is the kind of issue that tends to crop up. A lot.
RE[5]: Comment by Boldie
by unapersson on Tue 1st Apr 2008 13:07
in reply to "RE[4]: Comment by Boldie"
"This is not the case on OS X
OS X does at least have the ability to create a new folder in a save dialogue.
"
You're implying Gnome can't do that, but it can.
Whence the confusion?
Or did they remove it after 2.16, the one I just checked it on? That would make little sense if they did.
edit: O_o someone was first..
Edited 2008-04-01 13:09 UTC
OS X does at least have the ability to create a new folder in a save dialogue.
...
The file dialogue should then do what it needs to do to make that file path resolvable, including creating any folders that don't exist and giving the user the tools to achieve that.
...
...
The file dialogue should then do what it needs to do to make that file path resolvable, including creating any folders that don't exist and giving the user the tools to achieve that.
...
Why all the ranting and flailing at empty air?
Why all the babbling about "resolving paths" instead of dealing with files (a concept that would be lost on most users, btw)?
There's a big "Create Folder" button in the Gnome save file dialog, right next to the breadcrumb buttons.
OS X does at least have the ability to create a new folder in a save dialogue.
Gnome does this, so what's the issue?
"Oh, OSX does stuff like this!" is not a valid justification, nor is the perception that OS X is some kind of usability oracle. For some reason that attitude seems to pervade everyone who associates themselves with Gnome. You see people spinning on Mac forums like this as well.
In the same way the let's include everything and the kitchen sink pervades the KDE way of thinking? See what I did there?
"A file dialog should only deal with opening and saving files.
No, that is not what an open, and especially a save dialogue, is supposed to do, and it just shows how people have been brainwashed by this stuff. "
Ah I see. So people who have adopt a different approach and prefer that approach are mindless sheep who have been brainwashed. Got ya.
There are different DEs for different people. I like the OS X and Gnome way of doing things. You obviously don't. Choice is good, aye?
RE[5]: Comment by Boldie
by starnix on Wed 2nd Apr 2008 15:55
in reply to "RE[4]: Comment by Boldie"






Member since:
2005-07-07
Every other system has shown that the ability to do some common file operations in the open/save dialog does not add complexity or get in the way of opening and saving files. These features can be hidden in a context menu where they don't get in anyone's way.
Uhm, sorry. Every other system? This is not the case on OS X which is widely reputed to be one of the most usable operating systems around. Of course, there is the argument that what is usable to some is unusable to others but that's a different story. Gnome's file dialogs share a lot in common with OS X's file dialogs, in that they are minimalistic in design and provide only the tools you'd need for naming, creating new directories and traversing the filesystem.
A file dialog should only deal with opening and saving files. It is not a full file manager. That I believe is the approach Gnome is taking and it is what I feel most comfortable with. Of course there are other users who do not like such a "dumbed down" interface. As such, they will be glad that KDE exists to scratch that itch.