Re: Gnome 2.6: What were you thinking?

[bbarnich umich edu]

Is that it? To, me those can all be implemented in options rather than seperate
codebases. I mean seriously, it is just how the windows are handled that makes
the difference between spacial and browser mode. Seriously people, why? I want
to customize my interface, not follow what I *should* like

-- brad barnich

Quoting Benjamin Kahn <xkahn ximian com>:

> On Fri, 2004-05-14 at 08:04 -0700, Raul Acevedo wrote:
> > Hi Andrew, I've read the article before.  I understand that the
> > proponents of spatial mode claim that it's a very different model.
> >
> > That's fine.  I don't see what that has to do with what I said.
> >
> > What, exactly, is the difference between spatial and browser except:
> >
> > 1.  Spatial lacks toolbars/side panel, and has an extra button on the
> >     lower left.
> >
> > 2.  Spatial opens up new windows for each folder, whose location and
> >     size it remembers.
>
> 3.  Only one view of a folder can be open at a time.  Thus, if you open
>     your home directory twice, you won't get two nautilus windows,
>     you'll get a nautilus window at first and the second time the
>     nautilus window will raise to the top.  For most folder icons,
>     nautilus will "grey out" folders that are already opened.
>
> > I'm not seeking flame bait... I just really don't know what else is
> > functionally different.
> >
> > I do understand that many people believe these functional differences
> > lead to a very different navigational metaphor... but functionally, how
> > else are they different than above?
>
>
> --
> nautilus-list mailing list
> nautilus-list gnome org
> http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/nautilus-list
>