Re: [Nautilus-list] Nautilus optimized?

[Luke Hutchison <lukeh email com>]

On 01 Jun 2001 15:06:32 -0500, Jamin Philip Gray wrote:
> I can't say what Darin meant, but I can testify to the speed
> improvements in CVS nautilus as compared with 1.0.3.  Yoann has come
> up with some speed enhancements which went in after 1.0.3 was
> released.  That being said there is still a lot of room for
> improvement.  Unfortunately, profiling is not my area of expertise. 

Many people have found Nautilus to be great for what it is but a bit
slow or unwieldly for quick tasks, or for running on slow machines.
I know that a lot of good work is being put into optimizing it but
a lot of people keep wanting to keep gmc in there because of how
small and fast it is.

I've found a much better alternative, which I've mentioned in a couple
of other threads, yet this time I'm mentioning it completely aside
from UI design issues:  I have been playing with the ROX filer
( http://rox.sourceforge.net ) and it is the fastest, cleanest,
most powerful (in some respects, obviously Nautilus wins hands-down
in others) graphical filer that I've ever used.  It is very simple to
use but provides lots of "discoverable" features, like
select-by-if-statement and a shell prompt line that may be enabled.
After using it I think that it should be the filer that replaces
gmc as the liteweight option to Nautilus.  Try it and see for
yourself!

I am in no way affiliated with the ROX author, I simply have found
this filer to be very nice from both a novice and a power-user
point of view, and it's fast and light.

Luke Hutchison.