[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       kde-usability
Subject:    Re: "Home" name confusing
From:       David Roberts <dvdr18 () gmail ! com>
Date:       2006-10-17 10:51:00
Message-ID: 200610172051.02745.dvdr18 () gmail ! com
[Download RAW message or body]

> It takes less effort to delete a directory than to create a new one.
But I would have to do both

> IIUC, Kpersonalizer is being dropped.  A decision which I support.
Sorry, I wasn't aware of that. Is there anything taking it's place? I still 
think the user should be asked whether or not they want the directory 
structure created for them.

> Then you are confused about Windows vs. *NIX.  They are really not
> members of the same set.  Windows is really a DeskTop that runs on an OS
> that usually goes without a name (it started as DOS and then was 
> replaced by NT -- I presume that they are still using NT but have 
> dropped the name).  *NIX is an OS.  So it is KDE which should be 
> compared to Windows, not *NIX
Sorry for using the wrong term, however, my point still stands that both are 
completely different systems with different implementations.

> Having similarities 
> in how they work will make it easier for KDE to be adopted to replace 
> the Windows DeskTop.
I agree that they should be similar to some extent for this reason. However,  
I transfered to *nix/kde vecause they are unhappy with windows (and I'm 
assuming others share the same opinion), so why try to replicate it?

> KDE is a DeskTop.  A DeskTop is not *NIX.  *NIX is an OS that does not
> include a user interface.
Yes, I know. What I was saying is that it is fragmenting from the other 
desktop environments which use *nix.

> When you set the Documents path and start a non-KDE application using
> the KDE desktop, the current directory is NOT set to the Documents path
> directory.
Oh right, sorry, my bad :)

> Yes other DeskTops should adopt this feature.
Perhaps you should take this to freedesktop.org then

> Do you understand the difference between opinion and facts?
Yes. It is your opinion that we should change the home system. My facts are:
- it dictates a filesystem to the user which some people don't like
- it will fragment from other environments
- it will complicate something which is already working the way it is atm

>> Once again, nobody has recommended that people do this.
> 
> The default is by definition a recommendation.  If you are claiming
> otherwise, this will simply degenerate into a semantics discussion.
That's not what I said. I said that nobody has said "I think users should dump 
all their file directly to $HOME"

>> People just don't want the root documents directory to be moved.
> 
> As you said, do you have a link to the research for that.
I was referring to the people involved in this discussion who are opposed to 
this idea.

>   But, can you come up with some factual basis why my idea is better or
> worse than the current default.
Beacuse as I have said, and others haveagreed with me, I don't want a home 
filesystem forced upon me.

> And the link to your poll is where.  Or you referring to the self
> selected sample of those that joined the reactionary (NIH) AJS to make
> negative postings to this thread?
Yes, I was referring to within this thread, but neither argument has any 
stats.

>> "Default" is just a pretty way of saying forced system. It's like 
>> saying "DRM is to protect users from piracy".
> 
> That is a large load of CRAP.
Sorry, I got a little carried away there.

> You have both said that defaults force users to do
> things and that users can change the defaults.
I said if user's want a new system they can do this themselves. I realise that 
this system will also allow this, but it will take more effort for a user to 
set up their _own_ structure.

> And your point is what?
I have said this multiple times. Users should be given a choice of which 
system they want. I believe you that some may like your system, and others 
like the current system, so LET THEM CHOOSE.

> 1.      That the bugs be fixed so that it is possible to use the        
>         Documents directory path as whoever first added it to KDE
>         intended.
Yes, I agree with this.

> 2.      That as the default it point to a first level subdirectory
>         of $HOME.  I would suggest that we not repeat the error in
>         Windows of calling it: "My Documents".  On my system it is
>         called "Files".
Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying that this is a bad idea. All i'm saying is 
that we shouldn't force it upon people, but let them choose if they want this 
system, or the current system.

>         ISE.log
>         Lattice Semiconductor
Ok, no idea what these are, are they not configurable from within the app?
>         Mail
why not .mail?
>         bin
I don't see why the newb user would need this
>         cxoffice
this directory is configurable on installation
>         lost+found
i'm assuming home is a seperate partition, true, then this would be an issue
>         lx-viewer
>         sysinfo.txt
>         tyrerj.asc
once again, are these not configurable from within the app?
>         wine-0.9.16
> I don't 
> know if wine source still needs to be in $HOME to work or not.
I don't believe so, but I'm not an expert, you could always rename it 
to .wine-0.9.16

> The binary package has to be 
> somewhere to be installed.

> Source archives are not user data files associated with programs so they 
> would be kept somewhere else.
for both of those have a ~/downloads directory, you could have something 
similar

> I made that clear somewhere, but that doesn't mean that everything that 
> they do is bad.
All I'm saying is don't use that as a reason


Once again, to cap off my viewpoint as you keep seeming to miss it:
I think we should have both, but let the user decide which they want.

-- 
David Roberts
_______________________________________________
kde-usability mailing list
kde-usability@kde.org
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-usability

[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]