- David L Norris
- Indianapolis, Indiana, United States
Semi-topical babble about Radio, Computers, Linux, Life, the Universe, and Everything.
Previous Posts
Archived Posts
Netflix - Movies At Home
Netflix - Next In Queue
2005-01-14
Spatial or Not: GNOME vs. Windows
I'd like to illustrate just one of many reasons I love the "spatial" desktop in GNOME (and MacOS for that matter). I have touched on this before in my Modern Desktop Linux and UNIX Systems article. You can't really organize things in a "natural" way with a browser-based desktop like Windows or KDE. It seems artificial and cumbersome to me if every folder is always the same size, same shape, in the same place on the screen, and neatly compartmentalized into ugly little squares.
Generally I want folders to either stay where and how I left them or to show me only the newest items. With a spatial desktop I can have both auto-sorted and manually arranged folders. With a browser-based desktop I would be forced to live largely without the ability to leave things how I left them. Most file browsers regard "manually arranged" as a suggestion and not a divine right. Now, I admit that it does take time to organize things how you want them. I think because of this Windows refugees sometimes don't immediately see the benefit and jump to the conclusion that spatial orientation is like the old "Open Folders in a New Window" mode introduced and abandoned in Windows 95. Some complain about "all those extra windows opening up" when they encounter a spatial desktop for the first time.
I, for one, take comfort in the knowledge that my folders stay the way leave them, auto-sorted or not. I no longer find myself aimlessly clicking through folder after folder trying to find a single file among a sea of tiny nearly identical icons with only very small text labels to guide me. Windows and similar desktops force the user to read through similar looking file lists one after another to hunt for a single file. While GNOME allows my brain to navigate on auto-pilot using only familiar looking landmarks. When I reach my destination I see a landscape that looks exactly like I last left it. I don't have to wonder if I'm in the right place.
GNOME on Linux view of a folder:
Explorer on Windows view of a folder:
As I opened the folder on a Windows system I remembered that Windows relies on cryptic three letter extensions tacked on to the file name to determine the type of file. So Windows doesn't even know that my photos are photos. But I suppose for this demonstration that doesn't much matter since everything is always trapped inside a perfect little 128 pixel square and locked in a prison-like gridwork. When it does manage to recognize a photo Windows provides a tiny thumbnail preview. But the preview only works on writable folders and clutters up those folders with ugly Thumbs.db files.
Generally I want folders to either stay where and how I left them or to show me only the newest items. With a spatial desktop I can have both auto-sorted and manually arranged folders. With a browser-based desktop I would be forced to live largely without the ability to leave things how I left them. Most file browsers regard "manually arranged" as a suggestion and not a divine right. Now, I admit that it does take time to organize things how you want them. I think because of this Windows refugees sometimes don't immediately see the benefit and jump to the conclusion that spatial orientation is like the old "Open Folders in a New Window" mode introduced and abandoned in Windows 95. Some complain about "all those extra windows opening up" when they encounter a spatial desktop for the first time.
I, for one, take comfort in the knowledge that my folders stay the way leave them, auto-sorted or not. I no longer find myself aimlessly clicking through folder after folder trying to find a single file among a sea of tiny nearly identical icons with only very small text labels to guide me. Windows and similar desktops force the user to read through similar looking file lists one after another to hunt for a single file. While GNOME allows my brain to navigate on auto-pilot using only familiar looking landmarks. When I reach my destination I see a landscape that looks exactly like I last left it. I don't have to wonder if I'm in the right place.
GNOME on Linux view of a folder:
Explorer on Windows view of a folder:
As I opened the folder on a Windows system I remembered that Windows relies on cryptic three letter extensions tacked on to the file name to determine the type of file. So Windows doesn't even know that my photos are photos. But I suppose for this demonstration that doesn't much matter since everything is always trapped inside a perfect little 128 pixel square and locked in a prison-like gridwork. When it does manage to recognize a photo Windows provides a tiny thumbnail preview. But the preview only works on writable folders and clutters up those folders with ugly Thumbs.db files.