Home Messages Index
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Author IndexDate IndexThread Index

Re: good file manager for Linux?

  • Subject: Re: good file manager for Linux?
  • From: Roy Schestowitz <newsgroups@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Mon, 21 Nov 2005 10:52:17 +0000
  • Newsgroups: comp.os.linux.advocacy
  • Organization: schestowitz.com / MCC / Manchester University
  • References: <dls3m0$sg2$1@atlantis.news.tpi.pl> <pan.2005.>
  • Reply-to: newsgroups@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • User-agent: KNode/0.7.2
__/ [Kier] on Monday 21 November 2005 10:16 \__

> On Mon, 21 Nov 2005 10:23:01 +0100, Jacek Pop?awski wrote:
>> Do you know any good file manager for Linux?

I know many good file managers for Linux, but there are pros and cons to each
as you pointed out. It's usually a simplicity-versus-resource demands
trade-off. Different file managers suits different people (i.e. tastes),
purposes, hardware and window managers.

>> Almost everyone knows Midnight Commander. It uses ncurses, works in
>> textmode...

In my individual case (no flames please), this worked fine 10 years ago when
it was either DOS, some GUI launcher, or NC (Norton Commander in my case).
Then came Windows Explorer, but it was not yet as productive as NC. I stuck
to NC and, later on, NC for Windows, which was disappointing.

Ever since, file managers have evolved are are now better in terms of
productivity than Minight Commander and its 'siblings'. One ought to use
drag-and-drop when possible and also benefit from overall desktop
integration, filetypes and visual aides. So, Minight Commander, much like
vim or pine, has its honourable place in the museum or in terminal-based
devices. It is long-acquired habits that make such tools perpeturate, but
you are better off using a GUI unless command-line is the only option or you
need the power of the CLI - flexibility and expressiveness.

>> Many people use Konqueror. It first disadvantage is that it is part of
>> KDE. On computer with low memory you don't want to load whole KDE, so
>> starting Konqueror is pain. Another problem is that views of filelist is
>> little strange - there are many but I don't fully feel comfortable with
>> any - and I don't know how to configure two-panel view like in MC.

You can get a Midnight Commander-like view in Konqueror. Have a look under
view profiles (in Settings). It is all very highly-customisable. Have a play
with the options and 'massage' Konqueror until it suits your habits and

>> Another example is Nautilus. If you run it without GNOME started - it
>> will start GNOME, trash your wallpaper, put some icons and fill your
>> memory. I wonder is it intentional. Works even slower than Konqueror.
> I only use it with Gnome, so I wouldn't know if that's true or not. Why
> not try using it with Xfce?

I don't fancy file management in GNOME. I find it dull and unresponsive at
times. Then again, I use it on a weaker workstation, so I should avoid
making performance comparisons.

>> There is file manager called Gentoo (older than Gentoo distribution), I
>> used it for few months but I can't use it anymore - it's design is just
>> bad, you can select file with keyboard, you can select file with mouse,
>> and they are two different selections, you can operate on files selected
>> one way, another way, unselected, configuration is just painful - even
>> if it looks good at start.
> I like gentoo, myself. It's *intended* to be very configurable and
> flaxible, that's rather the idea :-)
>> I used emelfm before Gentoo, I tried emelfm2, but wasn't really impressed.
>> Last one I tried was Krusader. Norton Commander style, interesting?
>> Wrong! First thing to notice is that file list is too narrow. So I made
>> it wider, but after while it is too narrow again! OK, but design like
>> everywhere else... And it uses KDE like Konqueror.
>> To sum things up:
>> - when I use KDE I can use Krusader and Konqueror, they are almost
>> usable, but much worse than for example Dos Navigator 8 years ago
>> - when I am in textmode I can use mc, but in the last few years I was
>> always just using bash/zsh, because mc is not really user friendly, and
>> I hate trying to run any command in it (another reason is that I see
>> many people using mc because they can't use shell)
>> - I spent months trying to use Gentoo [1] and failed
>> - I still don't know any small, fast, usable file manager to use
> Xffm? Or why not try rox-filer? But it strikes me if you've tried all
> thses others without being satisfied then you aren't going to like *any*
> file manager. You should find the one you dislike the least and stick to
> that.

Back to the point about trade-off, find that one which is the least
poisonous. You will never find an ideal file manager if you require too
much. As I said, I am very happy with Konqueror. Although it is heavy and
slow, it is valuable in terms of productivity, which makes up for its speed.


Roy S. Schestowitz      |    Proprietary cripples communication
http://Schestowitz.com  |    SuSE Linux     |     PGP-Key: 0x74572E8E
 10:35am  up 18 days  6:29,  4 users,  load average: 0.39, 0.17, 0.11

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Author IndexDate IndexThread Index