Firefox - why is it better?

Again I am not trying to start a rant I just want to know.

I find firefox somewhat inferior to the previous mozilla. Why do
people support it so?

1. The ctrl-l option is somewhat worse than the previous ctrl-shift-l
option.
2. I would like my downloaded files to go in my home directory. So as
root I want them to go into /root. That may be unreasonable to some
people but it can't be done in firefox. The Desktop folder is the last
place I want to put them.
3. The interface to add helper applications is obscure compared to
mozilla.

And on and on. I guess I am just a curmudgeon. Remember I am not trying
to start a rant , I am just very curious why firefox is taking over.
-- 

=======================================================================
It's odd, and a little unsettling, to reflect upon the fact that
English is the only major language in which "I" is capitalized; in many
other languages "You" is capitalized and the "i" is lower case.
		-- Sydney J. Harris
-------------------------------------------
Aaron Konstam
Computer Science
Trinity University
One Trinity Place.
San Antonio, TX 78212-7200

telephone: [phone]
email:[e-mail]

[Jared Buck]

You can change the directory firefox downloads into by going to the Edit
- Preferences menu, then selecting downloads.  lots of stuff you can
change there, including where stuff gets downloaded to.

And as for the interface?  it's not hard, you just go to the firefox
extensions website, then download the extension you want, then restart
firefox after it installs.  All of them can be individually configured
from the Extensions dialog box under the Tools menu (just select the one
you want to work with and hit options.

Jared


On Tue, 2005-05-24 at 11:37 -0500, akonstam(a)trinity.edu wrote:
>  Again I am not trying to start a rant I just want to know.
>  
>  I find firefox somewhat inferior to the previous mozilla. Why do
>  people support it so?
>  
>  1. The ctrl-l option is somewhat worse than the previous ctrl-shift-l
>  option.
>  2. I would like my downloaded files to go in my home directory. So as
>  root I want them to go into /root. That may be unreasonable to some
>  people but it can't be done in firefox. The Desktop folder is the last
>  place I want to put them.
>  3. The interface to add helper applications is obscure compared to
>  mozilla.
>  
>  And on and on. I guess I am just a curmudgeon. Remember I am not trying
>  to start a rant , I am just very curious why firefox is taking over.
>  -- 
>  
>  =======================================================================
>  It's odd, and a little unsettling, to reflect upon the fact that
>  English is the only major language in which "I" is capitalized; in many
>  other languages "You" is capitalized and the "i" is lower case.
>          -- Sydney J. Harris
>  -------------------------------------------
>  Aaron Konstam
>  Computer Science
>  Trinity University
>  One Trinity Place.
>  San Antonio, TX 78212-7200
>  
>  telephone: [phone]
>  email:[e-mail]
>

On Tue, May 24, 2005 at 09:33:43AM -0700, Jared Buck wrote:
>  You can change the directory firefox downloads into by going to the
> Edit
>  - Preferences menu, then selecting downloads.  lots of stuff you can
>  change there, including where stuff gets downloaded to. 
This is not true. You can
put it in any directory but your home directory.
>  
>  And as for the interface?  it's not hard, you just go to the firefox
>  extensions website, then download the extension you want, then restart
>  firefox after it installs.  All of them can be individually configured
>  from the Extensions dialog box under the Tools menu (just select the one
>  you want to work with and hit options.
>  
>  Jared 
To me this is more complicated then going to a helper menu, entering a
application
type, one or more extensions and the program to deal with files of that type.

But again I do not want to start an argument about this.
>  
>  On Tue, 2005-05-24 at 11:37 -0500, akonstam(a)trinity.edu wrote:
>  > Again I am not trying to start a rant I just want to know.
>  > 
>  > I find firefox somewhat inferior to the previous mozilla. Why do
>  > people support it so?
>  > 
>  > 1. The ctrl-l option is somewhat worse than the previous ctrl-shift-l
>  > option.
>  > 2. I would like my downloaded files to go in my home directory. So as
>  > root I want them to go into /root. That may be unreasonable to some
>  > people but it can't be done in firefox. The Desktop folder is the last
>  > place I want to put them.
>  > 3. The interface to add helper applications is obscure compared to
>  > mozilla.
>  > 
>  > And on and on. I guess I am just a curmudgeon. Remember I am not trying
>  > to start a rant , I am just very curious why firefox is taking over.
>  > -- 
>  > 
>  > =======================================================================
>  > It's odd, and a little unsettling, to reflect upon the fact that
>  > English is the only major language in which "I" is capitalized; in many
>  > other languages "You" is capitalized and the "i" is lower case.
>  >         -- Sydney J. Harris
>  > -------------------------------------------
>  > Aaron Konstam
>  > Computer Science
>  > Trinity University
>  > One Trinity Place.
>  > San Antonio, TX 78212-7200
>  > 
>  > telephone: [phone]
>  > email:[e-mail]
>  >  
-- 

=======================================================================
Real computer scientists like having a computer on their desk, else how
could they read their mail?
-------------------------------------------
Aaron Konstam
Computer Science
Trinity University
One Trinity Place.
San Antonio, TX 78212-7200

telephone: [phone]
email:[e-mail]

[Matthew Miller]

On Tue, May 24, 2005 at 03:12:05PM -0500, akonstam(a)trinity.edu wrote:
>  > You can change the directory firefox downloads into by going to
> the Edit
>  > - Preferences menu, then selecting downloads.  lots of stuff you can
>  > change there, including where stuff gets downloaded to.
>  This is not true. You can put it in any directory but your home directory. 
What'dya mean? I tried it, and it set mine to /home/mattdm just fine.


-- 
Matthew Miller           mattdm(a)mattdm.org        <http://www.mattdm.org/>
Boston University Linux      ------>                <http://linux.bu.edu/>
Current office temperature: 73 degrees Fahrenheit.

[Matthew Miller]

On Tue, May 24, 2005 at 11:37:00AM -0500, akonstam(a)trinity.edu wrote:
>  Again I am not trying to start a rant I just want to know. 
The only reason it matters for the purposes of this list is: the upstream
project has decided to make Firefox/Thunderbird the main focus and no longer
update the Mozilla suite.

But I also have to comment on this one:

>  2. I would like my downloaded files to go in my home directory. So
> as
>  root I want them to go into /root. That may be unreasonable to some
>  people but it can't be done in firefox. The Desktop folder is the last
>  place I want to put them. 
DON'T run either Firefox or Mozilla as root! You're playing russian roulette
with security problems here. Big, complicated GUI programs should stay in
userspace.

(That said, you can easily change the default file save location with the
option under "Downloads".)


-- 
Matthew Miller           mattdm(a)mattdm.org        <http://www.mattdm.org/>
Boston University Linux      ------>                <http://linux.bu.edu/>
Current office temperature: 73 degrees Fahrenheit.

[John Dennis]

On Tue, May 24, 2005 at 11:37:00AM -0500, akonstam(a)trinity.edu wrote:

>   2. I would like my downloaded files to go in my home directory. So
> as
>   root I want them to go into /root 
Running any browser as root is like having unprotected sex, at some
point you're going to deeply regret it.

-- 
John Dennis <jdennis(a)redhat.com&gt;

On Tue, May 24, 2005 at 12:33:46PM -0400, Matthew Miller wrote:
>  On Tue, May 24, 2005 at 11:37:00AM -0500, akonstam(a)trinity.edu
> wrote:
>  > Again I am not trying to start a rant I just want to know.
>  
>  The only reason it matters for the purposes of this list is: the upstream
>  project has decided to make Firefox/Thunderbird the main focus and no longer
>  update the Mozilla suite.
>  
>  But I also have to comment on this one:
>  
>  > 2. I would like my downloaded files to go in my home directory. So as
>  > root I want them to go into /root. That may be unreasonable to some
>  > people but it can't be done in firefox. The Desktop folder is the last
>  > place I want to put them.
>  
>  DON'T run either Firefox or Mozilla as root! You're playing russian roulette
>  with security problems here. Big, complicated GUI programs should stay in
>  userspace.
>  
>  (That said, you can easily change the default file save location with the
>  option under "Downloads".) 
Ok, I agree downloading as root has dangers. I
normally don't do it. But the fact is
no matter who you run it as you can not have the downloads go into your home directory,
in my experience. But I am willing to learn. If someone can tell me how to do it I
would be grateful.
-------------------------------------------
Aaron Konstam
Computer Science
Trinity University
One Trinity Place.
San Antonio, TX 78212-7200

telephone: [phone]
email:[e-mail]

[Robert Couture]

On Tuesday 24 May 2005 12:37, akonstam(a)trinity.edu wrote:

>   2. I would like my downloaded files to go in my home directory. So
> as
>   root I want them to go into /root. That may be unreasonable to some
>   people but it can't be done in firefox. The Desktop folder is the last
>   place I want to put them. 
Edit -> Preferences -> Downloads.  Here you can select where you want files to 
be saved.

-Robert.

On Tue, May 24, 2005 at 12:39:16PM -0400, Robert Couture wrote:
>  On Tuesday 24 May 2005 12:37, akonstam(a)trinity.edu wrote:
>  
>  >  2. I would like my downloaded files to go in my home directory. So as
>  >  root I want them to go into /root. That may be unreasonable to some
>  >  people but it can't be done in firefox. The Desktop folder is the last
>  >  place I want to put them.
>  
>  Edit -> Preferences -> Downloads.  Here you can select where you want files to 
>  be saved.
>  
>  -Robert.
>   
Youi know  this is facinating. I tried for 1/2 hour, even using the help info. As
far as I can
see I can put the downloads in any directory except the users home directory. If you
can do it let me know how.


>  -- 
>  fedora-test-list mailing list
>  fedora-test-list(a)redhat.com
>  To unsubscribe: 
>  http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-test-list 
-- 

=======================================================================
Common sense is the most evenly distributed quantity in the world.
Everyone thinks he has enough.
	-- Descartes, 1637
-------------------------------------------
Aaron Konstam
Computer Science
Trinity University
One Trinity Place.
San Antonio, TX 78212-7200

telephone: [phone]
email:[e-mail]

[Michael Knepher]

On Tue, 2005-05-24 at 15:20 -0500, akonstam(a)trinity.edu wrote:
>  On Tue, May 24, 2005 at 12:39:16PM -0400, Robert Couture wrote:
>  > On Tuesday 24 May 2005 12:37, akonstam(a)trinity.edu wrote:
>  > 
>  > >  2. I would like my downloaded files to go in my home directory. So as
>  > >  root I want them to go into /root. That may be unreasonable to some
>  > >  people but it can't be done in firefox. The Desktop folder is the last
>  > >  place I want to put them.
>  > 
>  > Edit -> Preferences -> Downloads.  Here you can select where you want files to
>
>  > be saved.
>  > 
>  > -Robert.
>  > 
>  Youi know  this is facinating. I tried for 1/2 hour, even using the help info. As far as
> I can
>  see I can put the downloads in any directory except the users home directory. If you
>  can do it let me know how. 
Just how is it keeping you from selecting your home directory? Just a
guess, you may be getting bit by the bug, er, I mean "feature", in the
latest gtk+ file selector that insists on selecting the first subfolder
in a folder. So if you select "Home" in the folder hierarchy tabs or
double click the bookmark for your home directory, it will open ~/, but
the first folder will be selected. So clicking "Open" will cause that
subfolder to be selected, rather than "Home". You'll need to ctrl-click
the subfolder to de-select it, then click "Open".

>  
>  
>  > -- 
>  > fedora-test-list mailing list
>  > fedora-test-list(a)redhat.com
>  > To unsubscribe: 
>  > http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-test-list
>  
>  -- 
>  
>  =======================================================================
>  Common sense is the most evenly distributed quantity in the world.
>  Everyone thinks he has enough.
>  	-- Descartes, 1637
>  -------------------------------------------
>  Aaron Konstam
>  Computer Science
>  Trinity University
>  One Trinity Place.
>  San Antonio, TX 78212-7200
>  
>  telephone: [phone]
>  email:[e-mail]
>

[David Woodhouse]

On Tue, 2005-05-24 at 14:14 -0700, Michael Knepher wrote:
>  Just how is it keeping you from selecting your home directory? Just
> a
>  guess, you may be getting bit by the bug, er, I mean "feature", in the
>  latest gtk+ file selector that insists on selecting the first
>  subfolder in a folder.  
The new gtk+ file selector has to be the worst abomination in user
interface design that I've ever had the misfortune to encounter. 

I just love the way that when I ask firefox to open something
in /usr/bin/emacs, it takes five minutes to do so -- even _after_ I've
actually typed <Ctrl-L> "/usr/bin/emacs" <Enter>. Sometimes I have
to
select 'emacs' again after it's finished scanning the whole of the
contents of /usr/bin.

The fact that I can attempt to attach files in Evolution, typing the
same file name followed by <Enter> four times in a row, and get four
_different_ files, is particularly impressive.

-- 
dwmw2

[Daniel Veillard]

On Tue, May 24, 2005 at 11:11:51PM +0100, David Woodhouse wrote:
>  The new gtk+ file selector has to be the worst abomination in user
>  interface design that I've ever had the misfortune to encounter. 
>  
>  I just love the way that when I ask firefox to open something
>  in /usr/bin/emacs, it takes five minutes to do so -- even _after_ I've
>  actually typed <Ctrl-L> "/usr/bin/emacs" <Enter>. Sometimes I have
> to
>  select 'emacs' again after it's finished scanning the whole of the
>  contents of /usr/bin. 
  I have to agree this is really nasty, yes.

Daniel

-- 
Daniel Veillard      | Red Hat Desktop team http://redhat.com/
veillard(a)redhat.com  | libxml GNOME XML XSLT toolkit  http://xmlsoft.org/
http://veillard.com/ | Rpmfind RPM search engine http://rpmfind.net/

[Jared Buck]

On Tue, 2005-05-24 at 18:25 -0400, Daniel Veillard wrote:
>  On Tue, May 24, 2005 at 11:11:51PM +0100, David Woodhouse wrote:
>  > The new gtk+ file selector has to be the worst abomination in user
>  > interface design that I've ever had the misfortune to encounter. 
>  > 
>  > I just love the way that when I ask firefox to open something
>  > in /usr/bin/emacs, it takes five minutes to do so -- even _after_ I've
>  > actually typed <Ctrl-L> "/usr/bin/emacs" <Enter>. Sometimes I
> have to
>  > select 'emacs' again after it's finished scanning the whole of the
>  > contents of /usr/bin.
>  
>    I have to agree this is really nasty, yes.
>  
>  Daniel
>   
I've been noticing files opening slowly here too :(  you're right, it's
a piece of s***t and i wonder why they had to do that in the first
place.

Jared

[Alan Cox]

On Tue, May 24, 2005 at 04:07:47PM -0700, Jared Buck wrote:
>  I've been noticing files opening slowly here too :(  you're
> right, it's
>  a piece of s***t and i wonder why they had to do that in the first
>  place. 
Perhaps because they genuinely were trying to create a better desktop and got
bits of it wrong on this attempt. People need to file bugs for the cases it
does badly including details (eg an strace if it is being very slow may show
why), and if it doesn't do the expected saying what you expected to happen.

Alan

[Matthew Miller]

On Wed, May 25, 2005 at 10:15:08AM -0400, Alan Cox wrote:
>  Perhaps because they genuinely were trying to create a better desktop
> and
>  got bits of it wrong on this attempt. People need to file bugs for the
>  cases it does badly including details (eg an strace if it is being very
>  slow may show why), and if it doesn't do the expected saying what you
>  expected to happen. 
Thanks Alan. It's good to step back and look at it from that point of view.

Sometimes it's frustrating -- it feels like UI designers show up and say
"you geeks have no idea how to make a user interface", and then redesign
in a way which looks pretty but is far less functional.


-- 
Matthew Miller           mattdm(a)mattdm.org        <http://www.mattdm.org/>
Boston University Linux      ------>                <http://linux.bu.edu/>
Current office temperature: 73 degrees Fahrenheit.

[David Zeuthen]

On Wed, 2005-05-25 at 10:38 -0400, Matthew Miller wrote:
>  On Wed, May 25, 2005 at 10:15:08AM -0400, Alan Cox wrote:
>  > Perhaps because they genuinely were trying to create a better desktop and
>  > got bits of it wrong on this attempt. People need to file bugs for the
>  > cases it does badly including details (eg an strace if it is being very
>  > slow may show why), and if it doesn't do the expected saying what you
>  > expected to happen.
>  
>  Thanks Alan. It's good to step back and look at it from that point of view.
>  
>  Sometimes it's frustrating -- it feels like UI designers show up and say
>  "you geeks have no idea how to make a user interface", and then redesign
>  in a way which looks pretty but is far less functional. 
Uhm, I think it's pretty interesting that the original complaint
revolved around something an ordinary user would never do (or at least
never should): selecting the file '/usr/bin/emacs' in the file chooser.
When you think of it, it's simply a bug in the first place that users
(even hackers) need to do something like that. File bugs.

FWIW, I'm very happy about the new GTK+ file chooser. I like the
bookmarks (I have a 'Patches', 'Downloads', 'Hacking' bookmarks
that I
use all the time) and the fact that it shows my removable drives (it's
even dynamically updated). Maybe my workflow is just different (and
probably closer to the bulk of our intended user base); as a data point
you may note that I'm also using a graphical email client. Evolution :-)

However, that's not to say the issues reported shouldn't be fixed
though. File bugs.

Cheers,
David

[David Woodhouse]

On Wed, 2005-05-25 at 12:32 -0400, David Zeuthen wrote:
>  Uhm, I think it's pretty interesting that the original complaint
>  revolved around something an ordinary user would never do (or at least
>  never should): selecting the file '/usr/bin/emacs' in the file
>  chooser. 
That's just an example. Point it at _any_ large directory. Watch it
suck.

Sometimes I start pine to read my email while I'm waiting for Evolution.
Kmail is looking more and more attractive every day.

>  
>  However, that's not to say the issues reported shouldn't be fixed
>  though. File bugs.
>   
I probably would have filed a bug about it, but I suppose I consider it
an Evolution issue, because that's when it bites me most. Since I've
already got enough Evo issues outstanding, some of which even have
patches attached but _still_ aren't fixed, I can't really be bothered to
file any more. There has to come a point when you just give up on it and
start looking for an alternative.

-- 
dwmw2

[Jef Spaleta]

On 5/25/05, David Zeuthen <david(a)fubar.dk&gt; wrote:
>  FWIW, I'm very happy about the new GTK+ file chooser. I like the
>  bookmarks (I have a 'Patches', 'Downloads', 'Hacking' bookmarks
> that I
>  use all the time)  
Not to nitpick, but i find the bookmarks idea somewhat limiting
because all the bookmarks are global and show up for all applications.
It would be far more useful to me to be able to supplement the
bookmark list with application specific bookmarks. So instead of
having 10+ bookmarks that show up all the time. I could have the 3 or
4 relevant bookmarks that I use frequently for each application show
up.

-jef

[David Woodhouse]

On Thu, 2005-05-26 at 19:56 -0400, Jeff Spaleta wrote:
>  Not to nitpick, but i find the bookmarks idea somewhat limiting
>  because all the bookmarks are global and show up for all applications.
>  It would be far more useful to me to be able to supplement the
>  bookmark list with application specific bookmarks. So instead of
>  having 10+ bookmarks that show up all the time. I could have the 3 or
>  4 relevant bookmarks that I use frequently for each application show
>  up. 
I'd settle for it just remembering the last directory I pointed it at,
and starting there.

-- 
dwmw2

File selectors (was Why is Firefox Better)

[David Hagood]

As a long time user of Universal File Selector, and as a person who is 
also dismayed at the direction the GTK file selector is taking (and 
indeed, many of the directions Gnome is taking), I'd like to say this:

If, indeed, the model Gnome is heading toward is "more simplicity, more 
consistancy, more spatial-ness" then why not eliminate the file selector 
alltogether, and instead simply use Nautilus to drag and drop files onto 
the app? When an app requests a file selector, just launch a Nautilus 
window, and a drop-target window.

OK, now that you all are gagging - perhaps this thread is drifting a bit?

File selectors (was Why is Firefox Better)

[Alan Cox]

On Fri, May 27, 2005 at 06:30:20AM -0500, David D. Hagood wrote:
>  the app? When an app requests a file selector, just launch a Nautilus
>
>  window, and a drop-target window.
>  
>  OK, now that you all are gagging - perhaps this thread is drifting a bit? 
This is how openlook worked. It works very well indeed

[Dan Williams]

On Fri, 2005-05-27 at 08:43 +0100, David Woodhouse wrote:
>  On Thu, 2005-05-26 at 19:56 -0400, Jeff Spaleta wrote:
>  > Not to nitpick, but i find the bookmarks idea somewhat limiting
>  > because all the bookmarks are global and show up for all applications.
>  > It would be far more useful to me to be able to supplement the
>  > bookmark list with application specific bookmarks. So instead of
>  > having 10+ bookmarks that show up all the time. I could have the 3 or
>  > 4 relevant bookmarks that I use frequently for each application show
>  > up.
>  
>  I'd settle for it just remembering the last directory I pointed it at,
>  and starting there. 
Unfortunately, right now this is application-determined, not file
selector determined.  Each app that uses the file selector must specify
the directory to start at, otherwise the default is used (ie, ~).  I got
pissed off enough that I implemented last-directory-used for gedit.

Arguably, it should be controlled by the file selector APIs though.

Dan

[Dr J Austin]

On Wed, 2005-05-25 at 10:15 -0400, Alan Cox wrote:
>  On Tue, May 24, 2005 at 04:07:47PM -0700, Jared Buck wrote:
>  > I've been noticing files opening slowly here too :(  you're right, it's
>  > a piece of s***t and i wonder why they had to do that in the first
>  > place.
>  
>  Perhaps because they genuinely were trying to create a better desktop and got
>  bits of it wrong on this attempt. People need to file bugs for the cases it
>  does badly including details (eg an strace if it is being very slow may show
>  why), and if it doesn't do the expected saying what you expected to happen.
>  
>  Alan
>   
firefox-1.0.4.installer.tar.gz

works infinitely faster listing /usr/bin in that GUI !!
New interface too

John

[Matthew Miller]

On Tue, May 24, 2005 at 11:11:51PM +0100, David Woodhouse wrote:
>  The new gtk+ file selector has to be the worst abomination in user
>  interface design that I've ever had the misfortune to encounter.  
You can tell it's user-friendly because it requires more time and effort to
do the same thing.


-- 
Matthew Miller           mattdm(a)mattdm.org        <http://www.mattdm.org/>
Boston University Linux      ------>                <http://linux.bu.edu/>
Current office temperature: 73 degrees Fahrenheit.

[Rodd Clarkson]

On Tue, 2005-05-24 at 23:11 +0100, David Woodhouse wrote:
>  On Tue, 2005-05-24 at 14:14 -0700, Michael Knepher wrote:
>  > Just how is it keeping you from selecting your home directory? Just a
>  > guess, you may be getting bit by the bug, er, I mean "feature", in the
>  > latest gtk+ file selector that insists on selecting the first
>  > subfolder in a folder.  
Could this be solved by having the GTK+ file selector not select a file,
but still focus in the right area of the dialog (ie place the keyboard
focus in the file selection area, but not select a file)?

Has anyone filed a bug against this?

>  The new gtk+ file selector has to be the worst abomination in user
>  interface design that I've ever had the misfortune to encounter. 
>  
>  I just love the way that when I ask firefox to open something
>  in /usr/bin/emacs, it takes five minutes to do so -- even _after_ I've
>  actually typed <Ctrl-L> "/usr/bin/emacs" <Enter>. Sometimes I have
> to
>  select 'emacs' again after it's finished scanning the whole of the
>  contents of /usr/bin. 
Again, has anyone filed a bug against this.

Surely this could be fixed by having the file selector quickly check
whether 'emacs' is a file or a folder and if it's a file then open it
without first doing a folder search.


If no-one has filed bugs against these two problems then I'm happy to do
so.


Rodd
-- 
"It's a fine line between denial and faith.
 It's much better on my side"

GTK+ fileselector issues (was Re: Firefox - why is it better?)

[Rodd Clarkson]

>  > I just love the way that when I ask firefox to open something
>  > in /usr/bin/emacs, it takes five minutes to do so -- even _after_ I've
>  > actually typed <Ctrl-L> "/usr/bin/emacs" <Enter>. Sometimes I
> have to
>  > select 'emacs' again after it's finished scanning the whole of the
>  > contents of /usr/bin.
>  
>  Again, has anyone filed a bug against this.
>  
>  Surely this could be fixed by having the file selector quickly check
>  whether 'emacs' is a file or a folder and if it's a file then open it
>  without first doing a folder search. 
Actually, while having a look through gnome bugzilla and preparing to
file a bug against this (it seems to be a unique example worth some
thought) I noticed that what is happening here is actually correct.

By this I mean that pressing:

	<Ctrl-L> "/usr/bin/emacs" <Enter>

should open the "Open Location" dialog, locate the file
'/usr/bin/emacs'
and then close the dialog.

After this it's appropriate that it then lists all the files in the
folder (although the files shouldn't take so bloody long to load ;-]).
It's quite reasonable for the file selector in the case above to assume
that you may also wish to select other files from the directory.

I'm assuming that the problem is that pressing

	<Ctrl-L> "/usr/bin/emacs" <Enter> <Enter>

isn't as responsive as it might be.

The first <enter> should close the 'Open Location' dialog, the second
should close the "Open File" (fileselectory) dialog.

Is this really the problem?


Rodd


-- 
"It's a fine line between denial and faith.
 It's much better on my side"

GTK+ fileselector issues (was Re: Firefox - why is it better?)

[Matthew Miller]

On Wed, May 25, 2005 at 10:18:12AM +1000, Rodd Clarkson wrote:
>  Actually, while having a look through gnome bugzilla and preparing
> to
>  file a bug against this (it seems to be a unique example worth some
>  thought) I noticed that what is happening here is actually correct.
>  
>  By this I mean that pressing:
>  
>  	<Ctrl-L> "/usr/bin/emacs" <Enter>
>  
>  should open the "Open Location" dialog, locate the file
> '/usr/bin/emacs'
>  and then close the dialog. 
This isn't "correct" in any sane sense of the word. Having to hit a secret
key combo to enter a path name is ridiculous, and having that be a second
dialog is a serious regression.


[...]
>  I'm assuming that the problem is that pressing
>  
>  	<Ctrl-L> "/usr/bin/emacs" <Enter> <Enter>
>  
>  isn't as responsive as it might be. 
The problem is that one reason one might want to type rather than browse is
that it's actually much, much faster -- but now, there's extraneous
keystrokes required for no good reason.


-- 
Matthew Miller           mattdm(a)mattdm.org        <http://www.mattdm.org/>
Boston University Linux      ------>                <http://linux.bu.edu/>
Current office temperature: 73 degrees Fahrenheit.

GTK+ fileselector issues (was Re: Firefox - why is it better?)

[David Woodhouse]

On Tue, 2005-05-24 at 22:31 -0400, Matthew Miller wrote:
>  The problem is that one reason one might want to type rather than
>  browse is that it's actually much, much faster -- but now, there's
>  extraneous keystrokes required for no good reason. 
Most of the time I use the file selector, I'm trying to attach a file in
Evolution. In almost every case, I'm selecting and pasting the file name
as text from a gnome-terminal. Typing is overrated. 
>   
-- 
dwmw2

[Daniel Roesen]

On Tue, May 24, 2005 at 11:11:51PM +0100, David Woodhouse wrote:
>  The new gtk+ file selector has to be the worst abomination in user
>  interface design that I've ever had the misfortune to encounter.  
Hehe.

On Atari ST, people _paid_ for commercial alternative file selector
boxes! Some of them were really good. :-)

I don't understand what's so hard to get _file_selection_ done right.


Best regards,
Daniel

-- 
CLUE-RIPE -- Jabber: dr(a)cluenet.de -- dr@IRCnet -- PGP: 0xA85C8AA0

[Rodd Clarkson]

On Fri, 2005-05-27 at 01:18 +0200, Daniel Roesen wrote:
>  On Tue, May 24, 2005 at 11:11:51PM +0100, David Woodhouse wrote:
>  > The new gtk+ file selector has to be the worst abomination in user
>  > interface design that I've ever had the misfortune to encounter. 
>  
>  Hehe.
>  
>  On Atari ST, people _paid_ for commercial alternative file selector
>  boxes! Some of them were really good. :-)
>  
>  I don't understand what's so hard to get _file_selection_ done right. 
Mmmm, maybe you have answered your own question ;-]

My guess is that file selection is a tricky subject because everyone
thinks about how to do things a little differently, so everyone wants
there file selector to work a little differently.

I'm actually quite happy with the GTK+ file selector, for what it's
worth.  There's a few things (like big directories taking too long to
appear) that bug me, but I think it's orders of magnitude better than
the last file selector.  I love that all my mounts appear as a list and
that I can just mount them there (instead of having to do it elsewhere
and come back).  I can't wait until other applications figure that own
out (for example gFTP).



R.
-- 
"It's a fine line between denial and faith.
 It's much better on my side"

[Daniel Roesen]

On Fri, May 27, 2005 at 09:43:48AM +1000, Rodd Clarkson wrote:
>  > On Atari ST, people _paid_ for commercial alternative file
> selector
>  > boxes! Some of them were really good. :-)
>  > 
>  > I don't understand what's so hard to get _file_selection_ done right.
>  
>  Mmmm, maybe you have answered your own question ;-] 
Nope. We were paying as the TOS one sucked so hard and all usable
alternatives were at least shareware. Not because there were only few
geniusses who got it right. :-)


Best regards,
Daniel

-- 
CLUE-RIPE -- Jabber: dr(a)cluenet.de -- dr@IRCnet -- PGP: 0xA85C8AA0

[Rodd Clarkson]

On Fri, 2005-05-27 at 01:49 +0200, Daniel Roesen wrote:
>  On Fri, May 27, 2005 at 09:43:48AM +1000, Rodd Clarkson wrote:
>  > > On Atari ST, people _paid_ for commercial alternative file selector
>  > > boxes! Some of them were really good. :-)
>  > > 
>  > > I don't understand what's so hard to get _file_selection_ done right.
>  > 
>  > Mmmm, maybe you have answered your own question ;-]
>  
>  Nope. We were paying as the TOS one sucked so hard and all usable
>  alternatives were at least shareware. Not because there were only few
>  geniusses who got it right. :-) 
That's my point.  If designing a file selector is so easy, why were so
many alternatives available?


R.
-- 
"It's a fine line between denial and faith.
 It's much better on my side"

[Gregory Maxwell]

On 5/26/05, Rodd Clarkson <rodd(a)clarkson.id.au&gt; wrote:
>  My guess is that file selection is a tricky subject because everyone
>  thinks about how to do things a little differently, so everyone wants
>  there file selector to work a little differently. 
Agreed.
  
>  I'm actually quite happy with the GTK+ file selector, for what
> it's
>  worth.  There's a few things (like big directories taking too long to
>  appear) that bug me, but I think it's orders of magnitude better than
>  the last file selector.  I love that all my mounts appear as a list and
>  that I can just mount them there (instead of having to do it elsewhere
>  and come back).  I can't wait until other applications figure that own
>  out (for example gFTP). 
I really dislike the current GTK+ file selector, even ignoring its
poor performance on big directories. But I disliked all other
renditions to some degree or another as well. I've always chalked it
up to taste and thus never complained.

Why not make the file selector another app entirely? This would make
it easier for there to be alternatives, plus it might fit in nicely
with SElinux. (i.e. the app could be prevented from having FS access
outside it's own files, but still have the ability to open user files
since the file selector could be trusted to only open files the user
actually selected, or only write to names the user selected).

[Patrick W. Barnes]

Gregory Maxwell wrote:

> I really dislike the current GTK+ file selector, even ignoring its
> poor performance on big directories. But I disliked all other
> renditions to some degree or another as well. I've always chalked it
> up to taste and thus never complained.
>
> Why not make the file selector another app entirely? This would make
> it easier for there to be alternatives, plus it might fit in nicely
> with SElinux. (i.e. the app could be prevented from having FS access
> outside it's own files, but still have the ability to open user files
> since the file selector could be trusted to only open files the user
> actually selected, or only write to names the user selected).
>
>
>  
I think the current selector is horrible.  The two things that bother me
(and that seem to bother a lot of other people) are slow read times for
large directories, and that it doesn't provide a quick and easy way to
type in a path and filename.  Being able to type the path in is such a
simple provision, I don't see why it isn't in the dialog.  I could live
with the poor speeds if I could simply type in an absolute name and not
have to worry about browsing or pulling up another dialog.  I like the
bookmark capability, but it could be expanded and improved upon.  I
personally think that the KDE dialog has it about right.

As for making it a separate program, I don't think that is really
practical.  It would (should) not help any with SELinux.  The dialog
returns only a filename, it is not its place to actually load or save a
file.  That is something that only the calling application should do.
Trying to change that fundamental idea would be foolish and very
problematic.  Being able to change dialogs would be nice, but I think
that it would be best implemented as 'profiles' or 'interfaces' for one
piece of dialog software, not by splitting the function to multiple
programs.

--
Patrick "The N-Man" Barnes
nman64(a)n-man.com

www.n-man.com
--

[Daniel Roesen]

On Fri, May 27, 2005 at 01:18:12AM +0200, Daniel Roesen wrote:
>  On Atari ST, people _paid_ for commercial alternative file selector
>  boxes! Some of them were really good. :-)
>  
>  I don't understand what's so hard to get _file_selection_ done right. 
BTW... found some nice pages showing all relevant ones:

http://aicq.atari-users.net/file_sel/
http://atari.transaction.free.fr/interactive/software/3dom.htm
http://www.atarimagazines.com/startv5n4/uis.html

All this was 1987-1993 or so. UIS started in 1987... that's almost 20
years ago. :-)=


Best regards,
Daniel


-- 
CLUE-RIPE -- Jabber: dr(a)cluenet.de -- dr@IRCnet -- PGP: 0xA85C8AA0

[Tom London]

On 5/24/05, akonstam(a)trinity.edu <akonstam(a)trinity.edu&gt; wrote:
>  On Tue, May 24, 2005 at 12:39:16PM -0400, Robert Couture wrote:
>  > On Tuesday 24 May 2005 12:37, akonstam(a)trinity.edu wrote:
>  >
>  > >  2. I would like my downloaded files to go in my home directory. So as
>  > >  root I want them to go into /root. That may be unreasonable to some
>  > >  people but it can't be done in firefox. The Desktop folder is the last
>  > >  place I want to put them.
>  >
>  > Edit -> Preferences -> Downloads.  Here you can select where you want files
> to
>  > be saved.
>  >
>  > -Robert.
>  >
>  Youi know  this is facinating. I tried for 1/2 hour, even using the help info. As far as
> I can
>  see I can put the downloads in any directory except the users home directory. If you
>  can do it let me know how.
>   
I succeeded by selecting 'filesystem', then selecting 'home',
followed
by my home directory.

tom
-- 
Tom London

[OT] Re: Firefox - why is it better?

[Camilo Mesias]

akonstam

I used to feel the same but I'm now using Firefox & Thunderbird instead 
of Mozilla. The turning point for me was the improved interface for 
incremental searching of pages and source (type '/'), and the improved 
ability of TB to enable images in email on a message-by-message basis.

The only problem I have found in configuration is that Mozilla provides 
a GUI to select the 2nd scroll-wheel action (which goes backwards and 
forwards through history by default), and Firefox doesn't seem to. This 
causes erratic skipping through history if you fumble on a Synaptics 
touchpad which simulates the second scroll wheel.

The workaround is to use the power-user about:config URL to locate the 
setting in mozilla, and replicate it in Firefox:

mousewheel.horizscroll.withnokey.action: 0

-Cam

-- 
camilo(a)mesias.co.uk                                                 <--

[Simon Lanzmich]

Hi,
this seems to be a little off-topic here, since this list is just meant
to discuss the test release - and firefox is not that new, but I don't
mind.

Am Dienstag, den 24.05.2005, 11:37 -0500 schrieb akonstam(a)trinity.edu:
>  Again I am not trying to start a rant I just want to know.
>  
>  I find firefox somewhat inferior to the previous mozilla. Why do
>  people support it so?
>   
I haven't used the mozilla suite since it was 1.5 IIRC, but imho,
firefox feels a lot faster. Further, people may want just a browser, not
a complete suite, but this is my opinion.

>  1. The ctrl-l option is somewhat worse than the previous
> ctrl-shift-l
>  option.
>  2. I would like my downloaded files to go in my home directory. So as
>  root I want them to go into /root. That may be unreasonable to some
>  people but it can't be done in firefox. The Desktop folder is the last
>  place I want to put them. 
You can select a folder in Preferences | Downloads | Save all files to
this folder | Other... (from the dropdown list)
Besides, I think it is a bad idea to use the root user to browse the web
or do other every-day actions.

>  3. The interface to add helper applications is obscure compared to
>  mozilla.
>  
>  And on and on. I guess I am just a curmudgeon. Remember I am not trying
>  to start a rant , I am just very curious why firefox is taking over.
>  --